Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, February 13, 2024 (part 4 of 5)

35. One or more of the following findings are established by the applicant and confirmed by the Director of Parks & Recreation:
a. The heritage tree or heritage tree shrub has, or is likely to have, an adverse effect upon the structural integrity of a building, utility, or public or private right of way;
b. The physical condition or health of the tree or shrub, such as disease or infestation, warrants alteration or removal;
c. A construction project design cannot be altered to accommodate existing heritage trees or heritage shrubs.

An Arborist report prepared by Kurt Fouts dated September 25, 2022, inventoried the trees in the project area, including 33 heritage trees. The report recommended removal of 14 heritage trees. Six of the heritage trees recommended for removal due to their condition.

These trees include one silver wattle acacia experiencing trunk lean and co-dominant trunk, and five blackwood acacias with co-dominant trunks and/or canopy die-off. Eight additional heritage trees are proposed to be removed due to their conflict with the proposed building footprint and grading areas. An addendum letter dated February 3, 2023, evaluated whether an alternative building location would enable preservation of additional heritage trees. Due to various constraints, including required setbacks from highly-slopes areas of the site and the quarry to the east, a feasible alternative building placement that resulted in a greater degree of heritage tree preservation was not identified.

The City Urban Forester has reviewed the report and addendum and agrees with the recommendations. Each heritage tree to be removed must be replaced with one 24-inch box tree or three 15-gallon trees. Conditions of approval require the applicant to follow the recommendations in the report and to meet the tree replacement requirements for the heritage trees proposed for removal.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under a Statutory Exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or Zoning). Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 allows a lead agency to avoid repeating analyses that were already provided in a certified general plan EIR for a development project that

18.230

AGENDA REPORT
PC November 30, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – CP22-0164
PAGE 34
is consistent with the general plan. Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and its parallel CEQA Guidelines provision, section 15183, provide for streamlined environmental review for projects consistent with the general plan for which an EIR was certified. Subsection (d) further indicates that an effect of a project upon the environment shall not be considered “peculiar to the parcel or to the project…if uniformly applied development policies or standards” have been previously adopted by the city or county, with a finding based upon substantial evidence, that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that environmental effect when applied to future projects, unless substantial new information shows that the policies or standards would not substantially mitigate the environmental effect. Under these provisions of CEQA, the project has been found to be consistent with the General Plan. It has been determined that the City’s General Plan 2030 EIR has adequately addressed most environmental issues related to the project, and some site-specific project impacts have been analyzed and determined to be less than significant due to substantial mitigation resulting from General Plan policies, zoning regulations and/or development standards that are uniformly applied to development projects throughout the City.

Therefore, no further environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the project is exempt from further CEQA review. An environmental checklist attached to the Planning Commission staff report provides the explanations and support for this determination.

Submitted by:

Brittany Whitehill
Senior Planner
Approved by:

Eric Marlatt
Assistant Director of Planning and Community
Development
Attachments:
 Conditions of Approval
 Project Plans
 Statutory Exemption Checklist
 CEQA Notice of Exemption
 Appeal Letter Dated October 15, 2023
 Email Correspondence from Coastal Community Preschool Dated November 7, 2023  Geotechnical Letter from Dees and Associates Inc. Dated November 2, 2023  Zoning Administrator Action Minutes from October 4, 2023  October 4, 2023 Zoning Administrator Agenda Report
 Public Correspondence

18.231

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
City Hall
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting

ACTION SUMMARY
November 30, 2023
7:00 P.M. GENERAL BUSINESS AND MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST, COUNCIL

CHAMBERS
Call to Order-The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.

Roll Call-Commissioners Conway, Dawson, Gordon, McKelvey, Polhamus, and Kennedy were present. Commissioner Maxwell was absent with notification.

Statements of Disqualification-None.

Oral Communications-The following members of the public addressed the Commission: Frank Barron, Susan Monheit.

Approval of Minutes

1. Approval of the Minutes of November 2, 2023, and November 16, 2023.

MOTION: Motion made by Commissioner Polhamus, seconded by Commissioner Dawson to approve the minutes of November 2, 2023, and November 16, 2023.

ACTION: The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Conway, Dawson, Gordon, McKelvey, Polhamus, and Kennedy NOES: None
ABSENT: Maxwell
Public Hearings

2. 900 High Street Project Number: CP22-0164 Assessor's Parcel Number: 001- 022-40 Appeal of the Zoning Administrator Decision on the project at 900 High

18.232
Street involving a Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to divide a lot into two lots and construct a 40 unit (including 4 low-income units and 5 very low-income units), four-story apartment building within 20 feet of a 30 percent slope and to remove 14 heritage trees on a site with an existing church in the R-1-10 (Single Family Residence) zone district. Environmental Determination: Statutory Exemption; Applicant: Diana Alfaro; Filed:

November 30, 2022.

MOTION: Motion made by Commissioner Dawson, seconded by Commissioner Polhamus, to deny the appeal, upholding the Zoning Administrator acknowledgement of the environmental determination and approval of the Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval listed as Exhibit A of the staff report dated November 22, 2023, with the following additional Conditions of Approval:

Condition of Approval 56: Access to Lot 1 consistent with what is shown on the Tentative Map, Sheet C0.1, of the approved plans, shall be maintained and cannot be substantially modified without prior approval of the Director of Planning and Community Development or his/her designee.

Condition of Approval 57: Pursuant to the recommendations of the Geological Plan Review Letter prepared by Pacific Crest Engineering, dated June 29, 2023, a qualified geologist from Pacific Crest Engineering shall be present onsite to observe any excavations performed as part of the construction activities.

ACTION: The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Conway, Dawson, Gordon, McKelvey, Polhamus, Kennedy NOES: None
ABSENT: Maxwell
Information Items
Subcommittee/Advisory Body Oral Reports
Items Referred to Future Agendas
Adjournment-The meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m.

18.233

ZONINGADMINISTRATOR

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: September 29, 2023
AGENDA OF: October 4, 2023
ITEM NO: CP22-0164 900 High St.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Zoning Administrator acknowledge the environmental determination and approve the Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”.

PROJECT DATA
Property Owner: Peace United Church of Christ APN: 001-022-40 Project Applicant: Workbench Built, Diana Alfaro
Application Type: Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to divide a lot into two lots and construct a 40 unit (including four Low Income units and five Very Low Income units), five-story apartment building within 20 feet of a 30 percent slope and to remove 14 heritage trees on a site with an existing church in the R-1-10 (Single Family Residence) zone district.

Zoning: R-1-10 (Single Family Residence)
Project Consistency: Consistent with the above listed zone district General Plan: L (Low Density Residential)
Project Consistency: Consistent with the General Plan designation Land Use - existing: Church with preschool and dwelling - proposed: 40-unit apartment building; church with preschool and dwelling - surrounding: UCSC housing (north) quarry, single family homes, city owned land, church (east), single family homes (south), elementary school (west) Lot Area: 5.9 acres (258,825 square feet)
Lot Dimensions: Irregular
Coastal Review: Not in Coastal Zone
Environmental Review: Statutory Exemption per section 21083.3 of the Public Resources Code (Sec. 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines)
Planning Staff: Brittany Whitehill

18.234

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION & HISTORY
The project site is a 5.9-acre lot located on the
north side of High Street immediately to the
northeast of its intersection with Moore Street.

The site is surrounded by UCSC campus
housing to the north; a quarry, single family
homes, city owned land, and a church to the
east; single family homes across High Street to
the south; and Westlake Elementary School to
the west. The property is developed with a
church that was constructed in 1957. The church
campus hosts a preschool as well as a dwelling.

The site slopes upward from north to south, and
the unimproved north end of the site comprises
open grassland and trees.

The project proposes to split the lot into two lots.

The lower lot will be 3.9 acres and will retain the
existing church campus. The upper lot will be 2.0
Figure 1: Site and Surrounding Uses
acres. On the upper lot, the project proposes to construct a 40-unit, five-story residential apartment building. The project requires approval of a Minor Land Division permit to approve the tentative map for the lot split. In addition, the project requires approval of a Design Permit as it involves the construction of three or more units. The applicant has applied for a Density Bonus Request to allow for concessions/incentives and waivers to development standards. Because the building is proposed on a slope of 30 to 50 percent, the project requires approval of a Slope Development Permit. Finally, the project proposes to remove 14 heritage trees, requiring approval of a Heritage Tree Removal Permit. Because the project involves a Minor Land Division and a Density Bonus Request, the project must be heard at a public hearing with the Zoning Administrator.

The applicant submitted a preapplication for this project in 2022, and the preapplication was deemed complete on January 11, 2023 for consistency with the preapplication submittal requirements under SB330. The project is locked into all standards and policies in place at the time it was deemed complete under SB330, including standards in place prior to the effective date of the objective standards ordinance.

RESOURCES AND CONSTRAINTS
• Archaeology: The site is located within areas mapped in the General Plan as sensitive and highly sensitive for archaeological resources. Albion Environmental prepared an initial archaeological investigation in June 2019, and subsequent Extended Phase I Study in March, 2023. The reports did not indicate the presence of any intact archaeological resource but recommended that the applicant stop work and contact the appropriate authorities should earth-moving work result in discovery of an intact resource. This recommendation is consistent with a standard condition of approval that is included for this project.

18.235

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 3
• Historic: The site contains a church that was constructed in 1957 and is described as a property that is eligible, but has opted out, for listing on Volume III of the Santa Cruz Historic Building Survey. The church will remain as part of the development. • Geotechnical: A geotechnical investigation prepared by Dees and Associates dated August 11, 2021, found the soils suitable for residential development with implementation of recommendations in the report, which have been included as conditions of approval. • Sensitive Habitat: The northeastern portion of the site contains a eucalyptus grove that is identified in the General Plan as potentially containing monarch butterfly habitat. A report prepared by Ecosystems West Consulting Group dated May 20, 2020, and a follow-up report, dated January 4, 2023, concluded that the eucalyptus grove was not providing fall or winter roosting habitat, and was unlikely to provide suitable habitat in the future. The reports recommended a preconstruction survey be conducted in the fall prior to the commencement of construction, and that tree removal occur outside of the fall roosting period. Both recommendations are included as conditions of approval. • Heritage Trees: An Arborist report prepared by Kurt Fouts dated September 25, 2022, inventoried the trees in the project area, including 33 heritage trees. The report recommended removal of 14 heritage trees, six that are in poor condition and eight that are within the project footprint. An addendum letter dated February 3, 2023, evaluated whether an alternative building location would enable preservation of additional heritage trees, but did not identify a superior alternative.
• Bird-Safe Development: Not mapped.

ANALYSIS
General Plan Consistency
The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential, which accommodates single family residential neighborhoods typically comprising detached homes and with a density range of 1.1 to 10 dwellings per acre. However, the General Plan also supports clustering of residential development, with units closer together or attached, to respond to a site’s topography, environmental constraints, or adjacent uses. The existing church campus on the site limits the buildable area to the vacant land above the campus, which comprises the new 2.0-acre Lot 1. This layout, in addition to constraints stemming from City policy to maximize retention of heritage trees and a steep slope that limits access to the upper part of the site, supports the clustering of the units into a single apartment building.

The General Plan defines residential density as the “number of permanent dwelling units per acre over the entire project or development site.” In this case, the entire project site is 5.9 acres, and the new 40-unit building plus the existing unit within the church complex results in a density of 6.9 dwellings per acre, in the middle of the density range. To ensure future development does not exceed the density range, conditions of approval require limitations to be recorded on both new parcels to limit the overall site density to the maximum allowed under the General Plan.

The project is consistent with and serves to implement several General Plan goals and policies promoting the development of housing and especially affordable housing. These policies include:

18.236

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 4
• Housing Element Policy 2.2 – Facilitate the development of affordable housing through the provision of regulatory concessions, financial incentives and assistance, density bonuses, and other means.
• Housing Element Policy 2.7 – Encourage more fully integrated neighborhoods through the development of mixed income and affordable infill housing and through the placement of other affordable housing projects in neighborhoods that do not already have high levels of low income housing.
• Housing Element Policy 4.8 – Support the development of a variety of housing types, specifically smaller units and single-room occupancy units that address the needs of extremely low income households.
• Housing Element Policy 5.3 – Ensure that the character and design of both infill development and remodel/rehabilitation projects promote the vitality of existing neighborhoods.
• General Plan Policy LU1.1 – Relate residential, commercial, and industrial land use intensities to the capability and location of the land while ensuring optimum utilization of infill parcels.

Land Division Standards: New Lots
Santa Cruz Municipal Code (SCMC) Section 23.24.030.6(a) requires new lots to meet the minimum area and dimension requirements of the underlying zone district. Section 23.24.030.6(c) requires new lots to have a street frontage of at least 35 feet, and Section 23.24.030.6 (i) allows for the creation of flag lots with a minimum 20-foot frontage to respond to unusual lot patterns or physical constraints on a site. The following table and discussion describe the minor land division’s consistency with subdivision ordinance and R-1-10 zone district lot standards:

Required Lot 1 (flag lot) Lot 2 (front lot)
Lot area (net) 10,000 s.f. min. 72,140 171,705
Street frontage 35 feet min. (20
feet min. for flat
lot)
Approx. 24’
(flag lot)
Approx. 530’
Lot width 70 feet min. Approx. 204’ Approx. 454’
Lot depth 95 feet min. Approx. 274’ Approx. 354’
The lots must also be created to maintain required setbacks for existing buildings. The new lot lines along the east (side) and north (rear) of the new Lot 1 provide for a 12’6” side yard setback and 39’6” rear foot setback to the existing church buildings, consistent with the 10- and 30-foot respective setbacks required in the R-1-10 zone district.

Site Design
As shown in the proposed tentative parcel map, the subject property would be divided into two new lots. The front lot, labeled as Lot 2 on the proposed tentative parcel map, would be a 171,714 square foot (approximately 3.9-acre, irregular-shaped lot and would retain the existing church campus and surface parking. Lot 1 is proposed as an 87,120 square foot (2-acre) irregular flag lot behind Lot 2, with an approximately 24-foot-wide flagpole fronting onto High Street at the southeast corner of the project site.

18.237

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 5
The project will improve the existing
driveway onsite, ultimately providing two
access points from High Street (an “entrance
only” at the southwest corner and an
“entrance and exit” at the southeast corner).

This driveway will lead to surface level
parking on Lot 2 and continue onto Lot 1 to
provide access to the new apartment
complex. A private access easement would
encompass the driveways and surface
parking area to provide parking and
vehicular access to both Lots 1 and 2.

The new apartment building features a Vshaped footprint, positioned north of (behind) the existing church. Landscaping
comprised of existing trees and naturalized
grasses, as well as new landscaping, will
soften the appearance of the new building,
and provide a buffer for nearby uses. At the
northern edge of the site, a resident amenity
area including a paved path, seating areas,
barbeque areas, trellises, and enhanced
landscaping is proposed.

Figure 2: Site Configuration
(Building shown in yellow, circulation shown in grey)
Figure 3: Site Landscaping
Lot 1
Lot 2

18.238

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 6
Building Massing and Materials
The building ranges in height from three stories to five stories at its tallest point. The majority of the building is three to four stories, however a small portion of the building containing the elevator overrun, stair tower, a small trash room, and circulation space does reach five stories. Although the building is taller than the one- and two-story single-family homes, schools and churches in the nearby vicinity, the site has been configured such that the new building will be substantially screened from public view by the existing buildings on site. The height of the building steps down to mimic the sloped topography of the site.

Figure 4: View from rear (north)
The V-shaped building features a modern
architectural style, incorporating neutral
beige cement panel or stucco as the main body
material. Accent materials include a
corrugated metal roof screen, wood or fauxwood soffits and balcony side walls. The design features a multitude of windows, glass
doors and balconies to punctuate the façade
such that there are no large, blank building
walls. The proposed plans include notes
indicating that similar materials could be
utilized in lieu of the materials shown on the
plans. A condition of approval will require the
building permit submittal to adhere to the
materials indicated on the approved
Figure 5: View from entry (south)
entitlement plan set unless the Planning Department approves a variation from the approved materials.

Zoning Ordinance Consistency
The project site is located in the R-1-10 zone district, which primarily provides for single family residential uses. While the R-1-10 zone district does not provide for multi-family residential development, California Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(4) states that a project shall not be considered inconsistent with applicable zoning standards if it meets the General Plan density. A prohibition of multi-family development on the site would preclude development at the allowed density under the General Plan, and thus be inconsistent with California Government Code Section

18.239

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 7
65589.5(j)(4). In this case, the R-1-10 zone district allows one single family home on a lot, which directly conflicts with the General Plan density range of up to 10 units per acre. Therefore, the zoning standard must be waived, allowing a multiple unit project that meets the General Plan density range.

The following table describes consistency of the new development on Lot 2 with the R-1-10 zone district development standards and zoning ordinance parking standards:

Zoning Standard Proposed
Building Stories and
Height

2.5 stories and 30 feet 5 stories and 54’ height (incentive/concession #1 requested)
Accessory height and
stories
15 feet and 1 story 14’9.5” and 1 story
Front setback 25 feet 17’10.75” (incentive/concession #2 requested)
Side yard setback 10 feet 125’6” (west), 44’8” (east)
Rear yard setback 30 feet 65’11”
Section 24.12.140.2 of the municipal code prohibits an accessory building from being in the front yard. In this case, the proposed trash enclosure is adjacent to the main building and within the front setback of Lot 1. The applicant has requested a density bonus waiver to allow this location. The Density Bonus Request section of this report discusses this request as well as the concession/incentive requests noted in the above table.

Parking
State laws enacted by AB1851 and AB2097 supersede parking ratios required in the zoning ordinance and dictate the number of spaces required for this project. AB1851 added California Government Code section 65913.6, which allows up to 50 percent of existing church parking to be eliminated to accommodate a new housing development and allows the remaining church parking to be double counted toward the housing parking requirement. Furthermore, AB2097 modified California Government Code Section 65863.2 to eliminate any parking requirement for a site within half a mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. The project site is within half a mile of a planned major transit stop, and therefore parking is not required. While new parking is not required, and the existing parking serving the church can be eliminated without replacement, the project proposes new driveways leading to and from the building and 15 new parking spaces adjacent to the new building.

Zoning Standard Proposed
Parking space dimensions Standard: 8.5’ x 19’ min
Compact (up to 50% of required
parking): 7.5’ x 16’ min
7 standard stalls: 9’ x 19’
6 compact stalls: 9’ x 16’
Driveway width 12’ minimum 20’
Paving Concrete, asphalt, or other
approved surface
asphalt

18.240

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 8
Traffic
A Traffic Impact Study is required for any project that is estimated to generate 50 or more vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. A Trip Generation Memo dated December 12, 2022, was prepared for the project. The Trip Generation Memo estimated that the new apartment complex could generate between 20 and 26 PM peak hour trips. The trip generation estimation of 20 trips utilized ITE Land Use Code 220 for Multifamily Housing. The 26-trip estimation was based on Land Use Code 225 for Off-Campus Student Apartments, due to the site’s proximity to UCSC and potential for students to rent units onsite. Because both trip generation estimations were below 50 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour, a traffic impact study was not required to be prepared.

Density Bonus
The project proposes to provide five low income units and four very low income units, amounting to 22.5 percent of the 40 total units at the low income or lower level. This level of affordability exceeds the minimum 10 percent lower-income threshold to qualify the project for a density bonus.

The density bonus request does not include a request for density bonus units but does request concessions/incentives and a waiver from development standards. Per municipal code Section

24.16.225, the project qualifies for two incentives/concessions since it provides at least 20 percent of units to lower-income households.

The project requests concessions for increased building height and stories to allow a building that is five stories and 54 feet tall at its highest point and for a reduced front yard setback of 17’10.75” to the new building on Lot 1. Per municipal code Section 24.16.225.3, the project qualifies for such concessions when the applicant provides reasonable documentation showing that the requested concession results in actual and identifiable cost savings to the project to provide for affordable rents. The applicant has provided justification that the greater building height will reduce the project footprint, thus reducing costs associated with excavation, grading, and soil engineering. With regard to the front yard setback, the applicant has provided justification that the reduced front setback enables the building to be shifted away from the significantly sloped portion of the lot, thus reducing costs associated with grading, soil engineering, and overall construction.

SCMC Sec. 24.16.255.4 allows a density bonus project to qualify for waivers from development standards if it is shown that the standards will physically preclude the proposed housing development. The project is requesting a waiver to allow an accessory building, the trash enclosure, to be placed in front of the building and within the front yard setback of Lot 1. This is the only possible location for the trash enclosure that complies with meets Public Works refuse service standards and that avoids constraints such as steep slopes and heritage trees.

Community Outreach
The Community Outreach Policy for Planning Projects considers this project to be a large development project since it adds more than 25 new housing units. The outreach policy requires large projects to post the site upon project submittal and to hold a community meeting. The applicant completed the new application site posting on December 9, 2022. The applicant had submitted a preapplication for an earlier concept of the project in 2019 and held a community meeting on May 30, 2019. Approximately 100 community members attended the meeting and voiced questions and concerns regarding the number of new residents planned for the project, potential party houses, the church doing business with a developer, fair housing rules, and potential

18.241

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 9
fire hazards given the site’s location. Upon formal submittal of the current application, the applicant held a second community meeting on February 8, 2023. A total of 96 community members attended the virtual meeting. Participants raised questions and concerns about parking, traffic, bicycle parking, safety for schoolchildren at the adjacent Westlake Elementary School, open space, affordable housing, preferences for types of renters, project density and scale, location in the wildland urban interface, removal of trees, garbage management, construction noise, development of the meadow at the northern end of the site, and habitat for animals.

Environmental Review
The project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under a Statutory Exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and its parallel State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or Zoning).

Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 allows a lead agency to avoid repeating analyses that were already provided in a certified general plan EIR for a development project that is consistent with the general plan. Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and its parallel CEQA Guidelines provision, section 15183, provide for streamlined environmental review for projects consistent with the general plan for which an EIR was certified. Subsection (d) further indicates that an effect of a project upon the environment shall not be considered “peculiar to the parcel or to the project…if uniformly applied development policies or standards” have been previously adopted by the city or county, with a finding based upon substantial evidence, that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that environmental effect when applied to future projects, unless substantial new information shows that the policies or standards would not substantially mitigate the environmental effect. Under these provisions of CEQA, the project has been found to be consistent with the General Plan. It has been determined that the City’s General Plan 2030 EIR has adequately addressed most environmental issues related to the project, and some site-specific project impacts have been analyzed and determined to be less than significant due to substantial mitigation resulting from General Plan policies, zoning regulations and/or development standards that are uniformly applied to development projects throughout the City. Therefore, no further environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the project is exempt from further CEQA review. An environmental checklist is attached that provides the explanations and support for this determination.

SUMMARY
The project is consistent with the General Plan and meets all the required site development standards except as modified by density bonus waivers and concessions. Staff recommend approval of the Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the Findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit A.

FINDINGS

18.242

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 10
Tentative Parcel Map, Section 23.16.050

1. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with applicable general or specific plans adopted by the city of Santa Cruz.

The proposal to divide the 258,825 square foot (5.9-acre) project site into two parcels is consistent with the density requirements, goals, and policies of the L (Low Density Residential) General Plan designation and is consistent with the development standards of the R-1-10 zone district. The land division will result in the two parcels exceeding the minimum 10,000 square foot parcel size and 70-foot minimum lot width required in the R1-10 zone district.

Santa Cruz Municipal Code Sec. 23.24.030.6 (i) allows for the creation of a flag lot where warranted by physical conditions of land form, existing lot pattern, or unusual size and shape of parcels. The strip of land connecting the main portion of a flag lot to the street must be at least 20-feet wide and provide practical vehicular access; but it shall not be used to help satisfy the minimum lot area requirement of the zoning district.

The proposed subdivision results in a flag lot configuration that complies with the requirements of the Code and allows for infill development on the site while preserving the existing church and associated uses. The flag lot configuration allows for the proposed residential development to be located on a portion of the site with relatively low slope and minimal impacts to Heritage trees.

The project is also consistent with the goals and policies in the General Plan and the current Housing Element in that the project will maximize development on an underutilized infill parcel (Policy LU3.7.1) in a way that is consistent with surrounding single-family land uses (GP Policy LU4.1.2; Housing Element Policy 1.4). The subdivision and development have been configured to maximize preservation of heritage trees on the site (Policy LU2.3.6).

2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.

The subdivision and development have been designed to consolidate residential density on a portion of the site most suitable for development. The proposed subdivision and building configuration results in a site plan which preserves the existing church use onsite and allows for reuse of existing vehicular circulation areas. The building will be constructed on a portion of the site with a relatively low degree of slope and high soil stability, thereby minimizing grading associated with the project and potential geological hazards.

The newly created lot where the housing development will be sited will be physically suitable for the development of the residential use. The developable portion of the lot meets the minimum net lot area requirements for the R-1-10 zone district. The project site is surrounded by other residential uses and will have access to public utilities including sewer and water.

The design and improvements of the proposed land division are consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan in that the applicant is required to make streetscape

18.243

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 11
improvements including the construction of a new sidewalk with curb and gutter improvements at each frontage (CD4.3.5, M.4.1.7-M4.1.9) and all utilities serving future development will be required to be placed underground (CD4.2.3). The parcel is not located within a specific plan area.

3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

The site’s General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential accommodates single family residential neighborhoods typically comprising detached homes and with a density range of 1.1 to 10 dwellings per acre. The project site, in its entirety, is 5.9 acres in size, therefore the General Plan land use designation would accommodate up to 59 units on the site. The project proposes 40 units, which is consistent with the residential density that was studies and anticipated in the 2030 General Plan.

The residential development will be placed entirely on Lot 1, comprising 2 acres. General Plan Policy LU3.7.1 supports clustering of residential development, with units closer together or attached, to respond to a site’s topography, environmental constraints, or adjacent uses. In this case, the existing church campus on the site limits the buildable area to the vacant land above the campus, which comprises the new 2.0-acre Lot 1. This layout, in addition to constraints associated with City policy to maximize retention of heritage trees and a steep slope that limits access to the upper part of the site, supports the clustering of the units into a single apartment building.

4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The northeastern portion of the site contains a eucalyptus grove that is identified in the General Plan as potentially containing monarch butterfly habitat. An analysis prepared by Ecosystems West Consulting Group concluded that the eucalyptus grove was not providing fall or winter roosting habitat and was unlikely to provide suitable habitat in the future. The reports recommended a preconstruction survey be conducted in the fall prior to the commencement of construction, and that tree removal occur outside of the fall roosting period. Both recommendations are included as conditions of approval with the project to avoid potential adverse impacts to wildlife habitats.

The project includes a standard condition of approval that, if project site work occurs anytime between February 1 and August 31, the applicant shall submit documentation of a preconstruction nesting bird survey by a qualified biologist prior to the start of work.

Preconstruction surveys of nesting birds and roosting monarchs will minimize any potential adverse impact to wildlife or their habitat on the site.

18.244

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 12

5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems.

The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems in that the applicant will be required to make site and utility improvements in accordance with City Standards and Public Works design criteria. Storm water treatment and retention facilities designed for the proposed Lot 1 and residential development comply with City standards.

The new residential development on the proposed Lot 1 will be required to meet all requirements of the California Building Code and all applicable City Ordinances.

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or the use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

The site does not contain any existing public easements that would be impacted by the project or subdivision.

Design Permit, Section 24.08.430

7. The site plan and building design are consistent with design and development policies of the General Plan, any element of the General Plan, and any area plan, specific plan, or other city policy for physical development. If located in the Coastal Zone, the site plan and building design are also consistent with policies of the Local Coastal Program.

Although the site’s General Plan land use designation Low Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation and R-1-10 zone district envisions primarily single-family development, Senate Bill 330 (SB330), and the amendments it made to the Housing Accountability Act, identifies the General Plan as superseding any inconsistent zoning designation and requires an agency to permit residential development on a particular site at the density allowed under the General Plan. In this case, the density proposed is within the density range envisioned in the General Plan.

The entire project site is 5.9 acres, and the new 40-unit building plus the existing unit within the church complex results in a density of 6.9 dwellings per acre, in the middle of the density range. To ensure future development does not exceed the density range envisioned in the General Plan, conditions of approval require limitations to be recorded on both new parcels to limit the overall site density to the maximum allowed.

The project bolsters several policies of the existing Housing Element related to facilitating the development of affordable housing through density bonus and other means (HE2.2), encouraging fully integrated neighborhoods with new affordable residential development featuring a variety of housing types in areas of the City low concentrations of affordable housing (HE 2.7 and 4.8), and ensuring that the character and design of both infill development and remodel/rehabilitation projects promote the vitality of existing neighborhoods (HE 5.3). The is consistent with General Plan Policy LU1.1 by optimizing

18.245

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 13
development intensity of an infill parcel that is adequately served by public utilities, and located near community amenities, including several religious facilities, elementary and higher education facilities, existing public transit service.

The site is located within areas mapped in the General Plan as sensitive and highly sensitive for archaeological resources. Archeological assessments of the site during did not indicate the presence of any intact archaeological resource but recommended that the applicant stop work and contact the appropriate authorities should earth-moving work result in discovery of an intact resource. This recommendation is consistent with a standard condition of approval, which aims to identify and protect archeological resources throughout the construction process. This condition of approval is included in the recommended conditions of approval.

General Plan policy HZ3.2.3 requires interior noise in all new multifamily housing does not exceed 45 dBA. An initial noise assessment letter prepared by Edward L Pack Associates Inc. dated August 9, 2022, noted that the only possible source of significant noise at the site would be the playgrounds at the adjacent Westlake Elementary School. Given the distance between the playgrounds and the proposed building footprint (approximately 400 feet), noise impacts on residents are expected to be minimal and consistent with the General Plan policy.

The project is not located in the focus area of any area plan. The project is not located in the Coastal Zone.

8. For non-residential projects, the project’s location, size, height, operations, and other significant features and characteristics are compatible with and do not adversely affect or further degrade adjacent properties, the surrounding neighborhood, or the public health, safety, and welfare. For residential projects, the project complies with the objective standards and requirements of the zoning district in which it is located, as well as any objective standards of any area plan or other regulatory document that applies to the area in which the project is located.

The project complies with all development standards of the R-1-10 zone district and all other applicable sections of Chapter 24 (Zoning) of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code, that were in effect at the time the project’s SB330 preapplication was deemed complete, except as modified by density bonus concessions and waivers. An SB330 preapplication associated with the project was deemed complete prior to the City’s adoption of the citywide Objective Design Standards for Multifamily Housing (Objective Standards), therefore the project is not subject to the Objective Standards.

9. For non-residential projects, the project provides for an arrangement of uses, buildings, structures, open spaces, and other improvements that are compatible with the scale and character of the adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhood.

The project is a residential project; therefore, this finding does not apply.

18.246

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 14

10. The exterior design and appearance of buildings and structures and the design of the site plan shall be compatible with design and appearance of other existing buildings and structures in neighborhoods which have established architectural character worthy of preservation.

The project complies with all applicable objective development and design standards of Chapter 24 (Zoning) of the municipal code, except as modified by the density bonus request.

The site contains a church that was constructed in 1957 and is described as a property that is eligible, but has opted out, for listing on Volume III of the Santa Cruz Historic Building Survey. The church will remain as part of the development; therefore, the new residential development will have no impact on the existing building. Additionally, the new apartment is sited to be largely screened from public view. The proposed development incorporates angled massing, as well as colors and materials, that are compatible with the existing church building. Therefore, any portions of the proposed building that are visible from the street will be compatible with the existing church building and will not adversely impact the church campus’s context.

The site is not located within a historic district or within an area plan that seeks to preserve an established architectural style. Although there are several listed historic resources along High Street, the new development is set back substantially from High Street and will not result in any visual impacts affecting the context of any historic resource in its vicinity.

11. Design of the site plan respects design principles in terms of maintaining a balance of scale, form and proportion, using design components which are harmonious, and materials and colors which blend with elements of the site plan and surrounding areas.

Location of structures takes into account maintenance of public views; rooftop mechanical equipment is incorporated into roof design or screened from public rightsof-way to the extent possible. Utility installations such as trash enclosures, storage units, traffic-control devices, transformer vaults and electrical meters are accessible and screened.

The project maintains a balance of scale, form and proportion by breaking up the building massing into a V-shaped configuration and stepping the building height to mimic the sloped topography of the site. The site is designed such that the new building will be substantially screened from view from public right of way and surrounding properties. The site design includes significant setbacks from surrounding property lines, which allow for a landscape buffer comprised of existing trees and naturalized grasses, as well as a varied palette of new plants.

The design features a multitude of windows, glass doors and balconies to punctuate the façade such that there are no large, blank building walls. The plans include a proposed material palette but indicate that similar alternative materials may be proposed during the building permit phase. To ensure that the materials will be of high quality and compatible with the existing and surrounding development, a condition of approval will require that any

18.247

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 15
deviation from the proposed materials be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of the building permit.

The trash enclosure will be screened from public view by the existing church campus to remain onsite. Existing trees to remain along the Western property line will provide a visual screen between Westlake Elementary and the trash enclosure. A condition of approval requires any rooftop mechanical equipment or utility installations to be screened from public view and requires utility installations to be accessible. The site does not include or contribute to a viewshed of any significant public views identified in the General Plan.

12. Where a site plan abuts, or is in close proximity to, uses other than that proposed, the plan shall take into account its effect on other land uses. Where a nonresidential use abuts or is in close proximity to a residential use, the effect of the site plan should maintain the residential quality of adjacent or nearby areas.

The project site does abut several different land uses, including UCSC campus housing to the north; a quarry, single family homes, city owned land, and a church to the east; single family homes across High Street to the south; and Westlake Elementary School to the west.

Because the proposed residential development is consistent with the allowed densities in the General Plan, the project will not affect the use High Street beyond the expected increase in bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle usage as anticipated under the city buildout projected in the General Plan. The residential use is located within a predominately residential neighborhood and is not anticipated to result in adverse noise or operational impacts to adjacent school and church uses, or single family homes.

13. To the extent feasible, the orientation and location of buildings, structures, open spaces and other features of the site plan maintain natural resources including significant trees and shrubs, minimize impacts to solar access of adjacent properties, and minimize alteration of natural land forms; building profiles, location, and orientation must relate to natural land forms.

The report recommended removal of 14 heritage trees, six that are in poor condition and eight that are within the project footprint. An addendum letter dated February 3, 2023, evaluated whether an alternative building location would enable preservation of additional heritage trees, but did not identify a superior alternative. The orientation and location of the building on the site maximizes preservation of heritage trees while avoiding highly sloped areas. The building has been designed to be significantly screened from view from the street and surrounding properties, and to step down in height with the hillside, thereby minimizing its perceived height, as well as required grading and alteration of natural land forms. The proposed landscape plan incorporates a variety of native plants while maintaining much of the site in a natural state. A shadow study was submitted by the applicant indicating that the proposed building is not expected to significantly worsen shading impacts to adjacent properties beyond current conditions.

18.248

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 16

14. The site plan ensures that the scale, bulk, and setbacks of new development preserves important public views along the ocean and of designated scenic coastal areas. Where appropriate and feasible, the project shall restore and enhance visual quality of visually degraded areas.

The nearest vantage points from which the coast may be viewable where the project could conceivably impact coastal views are located along Hagar Court, west (uphill) from the project. These vantage points are obstructed by existing buildings; therefore, the proposed project would not create any new impact on important public views or designated scenic coastal areas.

15. The site plan shall reasonably protect against external and internal noise, vibration and other factors which may tend to make the environment less desirable. The site plan should respect the need for privacy of adjacent residents.

Any noise or vibrations that may occur as a result of construction are temporary; once constructed, the residential apartment building will generate noise typical of a residential neighborhood. An initial noise assessment letter prepared by Edward L Pack Associates Inc. dated August 9, 2022, noted that the only possible source of significant noise impacting the project site would be the playgrounds at the adjacent Westlake Elementary School. Given the distance between the playgrounds and the proposed building footprint (approximately 400 feet), noise impacts on residents are expected to be minimal and consistent with the General Plan policy.

16. Building and structures shall be designed and oriented to make use of natural elements such as solar radiation, wind, and landscaping for heating, cooling, ventilation, and lighting.

The new building has windows on all elevations that will allow natural light and ventilation into the building. The balconies and terraces provide each unit with private outdoor space to access sunlight and fresh air. The site plan retains several heritage trees throughout the site and includes new landscaping that will provide cooling and shading. The flat roof provides a space where solar photovoltaic equipment could be installed.

Slope Development Permit, Section 24.08.820

17. Measures have been included within the design of the project to mitigate impacts on environmental constraint areas identified in the Natural Resources and Conservation Element and the Safety Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program.

The northeastern portion of the site contains a eucalyptus grove that is identified in the General Plan as potentially containing monarch butterfly habitat. To identify and mitigate any adverse impacts to monarch butterfly habitat onsite, the project application submittal included a report prepared by Ecosystems West Consulting Group dated May 20, 2020, and a follow-up report, dated January 4, 2023. The reports concluded that the eucalyptus grove

18.249

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 17
was not providing fall or winter roosting habitat and was unlikely to provide suitable habitat in the future. The reports recommended a preconstruction survey be conducted in the fall prior to the commencement of construction, and that tree removal occur outside of the fall roosting period.

The site is located within areas mapped in the General Plan as sensitive and highly sensitive for archaeological resources. Albion Environmental prepared an initial archaeological investigation in June 2019, and subsequent Extended Phase I Study in March 2023. The reports did not indicate the presence of any intact archaeological resource but recommended that the applicant stop work and contact the appropriate authorities should earth-moving work result in discovery of an intact resource. The recommended condition of approval includes standard conditions that are consistent with the recommendations of Albion Environmental to minimize potential impacts to archeological resources on the site.

18. Landscaping of an appropriate type, size, and quality is proposed to mitigate any adverse environmental effect.

The project proposes to remove fourteen heritage trees. The planting palette includes thirtysix new trees, which, at maturity, are expected to result in comparable or greater tree canopy as compared to existing conditions. The proposed plant palette includes numerous native species and incorporates a variety of groundcovers, shrubs and trees. A majority of the site will retain its existing, naturalized landscaping. The existing to remain and proposed landscaping will minimize potential environmental impacts typically associated with development such as groundwater runoff, erosion, and loss of tree canopy.

19. Usable open space is proposed in an amount equal to that normally required.

The project is located within the R-1-10 zone district, which does not have a minimum open space requirement. However, the project provides one or more private balconies of terraces for all units, as well as a common resident amenity area at the northern portion of the site, which includes a paved path, seating areas, barbeque areas, trellises, and enhanced landscaping.

20. A registered civil engineer or other qualified professional will design streets, buildings, and other man-made structures to conform with existing landforms and topography.

The project applicant has engaged the services of a licensed civil engineer to aid in the designing of driveway and site improvements, as well as the building. A condition of approval will require that all civil plan sheets of the building permit submittal be stamped by a licensed civil engineer.

21. Adequate fire safety measures as required by the city fire department have been incorporated into the design of the proposed development, when located in a designated fire hazard area.

18.250

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 18
The project site is not located within a designated fire hazard area; therefore, this finding does not apply.

22. The proposed project employs architectural and design elements which in total serve to reduce the mass and bulk of structures to protect public views. Such elements may include:
a. Multiple floor levels which follow natural slopes: The building height ranges from three stories to five stories and is staggered to follow the natural slope of the property, thereby minimizing visual impacts and grading quantities. b. Multiple roof lines to provide visual interest and break up the visual impact of the building: The stepped-down design of the building results in multiple, staggered roof lines that reduce the perceived mass and bulk of the building and preserve views from onsite. The project is not expected to impact public views. c. Decks and balconies to provide building articulation: The building facades are punctuated with balconies and incorporate a multitude of windows and several accent materials. These features provide building articulation to enhance visual interest of the building while reducing the appearance of mass and bulk. d. Foundation types such as poles, piles, or stepped levels which minimize cut and fill and need for retaining walls: The stepped-down building design reduces grading needs to accommodate the project. Additionally, the project proposes minor improvements to existing driveways, in lieu of new driveways. Maintaining existing driveways to provide access to the site will further reduce grading quantities.
e. Fence lines, walls, and other features which blend with the terrain rather than strike off at an angle against it: The project will maintain and improve existing fences along the shared side property lines. A new, three-foot wooden and hog wire fence is proposed along the rear property line. The fence will be of minimal height and highly transparent and will blend into the natural terrain. A low, small retaining wall is proposed directly southeast of the proposed building. This retaining wall will be incorporated into a staggered landscape design that is compatible with the natural surroundings and will not adversely impact any public views.

23. If a project proposed for construction is in a landslide area identified in a site-specific geological report prepared pursuant to Section 24.14.030(1)(d), findings must be made that mitigation measures necessary to fulfill the purpose of this part have been incorporated into project design, based on the project’s environmental review and geotechnical reports.

A project-specific geotechnical report prepared by Dees & Associates, Inc. in March 2023 included a stability analysis of the portion of the site where the building will be situated. The analysis indicated that the portion of the site where the proposed building isstable under both

18.251

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 19
static and seismic conditions. The project has been designed in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. A condition of approval will require that a Phase 2 geotechnical study focused on additional subsurface exploration of the marble formation be conducted prior to issuance of the building permit, consistent with the recommendations of the initial geotechnical report. Additionally, a condition of approval will require that the geotechnical engineer provide a letter indicating that their recommendations were incorporated into the building permit design, prior to issuance of the building permit, and implemented throughout construction, prior to building permit final.

Density Bonus, Section 24.16.270.2

24. The housing development is eligible for a density bonus and any concessions, incentives, waivers, modifications, or modified parking standards requested; conforms to all standards for affordability included in this section; and includes a financing mechanism for all implementation and monitoring costs.

The project proposes to provide five low income units and four very low income units, amounting to 22.5 percent of the 40 total units at the low income or lower level. This level of affordability exceeds the minimum 10 percent lower-income threshold to qualify the project for a density bonus. The density bonus request does not propose additional units, but does request concessions/incentives and a waiver from development standards. Per section

24.16.225 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code, the project qualifies for two incentives/concessions since it provides at least 20 percent of units to lower-income households. Per section 24.16.255 (4), the project is eligible to request an unlimited number of waivers or modifications to development standard, if those standards physically preclude the construction of the housing development, and the housing development is eligible for density bonus. Although the project does not propose density bonus units, it is eligible for density bonus based on the number of low income and very low income units provided and may request two incentives/concessions and unlimited waivers.

AB2097 modified California Government Code Section 65863.2 to eliminate any parking requirement for a site within half a mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. The project site is within half a mile of a planned major transit stop, and therefore parking is not required for the project.

The project will be privately financed; all financing costs for implementation and monitoring will be provided by the applicant.

25. Any requested incentive or concession will result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable rents or affordable ownership costs based upon appropriate financial analysis and documentation if required by Section 24.16.255.

Per Section 24.16.225.3, a density bonus project qualifies for concessions when the applicant provides reasonable documentation showing that the requested concession results in actual and identifiable cost savings to the project to provide for affordable rents. The project

18.252

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 20
requests a concession for increased building height and stories to allow a building that is five stories and 54 feet tall at its highest point. The applicant has provided justification that the greater building height will reduce the project footprint, thus reducing costs associated with excavation, grading, and soil engineering. The project also requests a concession for a reduced front yard of 17’10.75”, in lieu of the minimum 20’ front setback required in the R1-10 zone district. The applicant has provided justification that the reduced front setback enables the building to be shifted away from the significantly sloped portion of the lot, thus reducing costs associated with grading, soil engineering, and overall construction.

26. If the density bonus is based all or in part on dedication of land, the approval body has made the findings included in Section 24.16.230.

The project is not based on dedication of land; therefore, this finding does not apply.

27. If the density bonus, incentive, or concession is based all or in part on the inclusion of a child care center, the development conforms to the standards included in Section 24.16.235.

The project does not include a child care center; therefore, this finding does not apply.

28. If the density bonus incentive or concession is approved for a condominium conversion, the development conforms to the standards included in Section 24.16.240.

The project does not include a condominium conversion; therefore, this finding does not apply.

29. If the incentive or concession includes mixed-use buildings or developments, the nonresidential land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and the proposed nonresidential uses are compatible with the housing development and with existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing development will be located.

The project does not include a mixed-use building or development; therefore, this finding does not apply.

30. If a waiver or modification is requested, the applicant has shown that the development standards for which the waiver or modification is requested will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the housing development at the densities or with the incentives or concessions permitted by this Part 3.

Section 24.16.255.4 of the municipal code allows a density bonus project to qualify for an unlimited number of waivers from development standards if it is shown that the standards will physically preclude the proposed housing development. The project is required to construct a new trash enclosure to accommodate refuse. The project is requesting a waiver to allow an accessory building, the trash enclosure, to be placed adjacent to the apartment building and within the front setback of Lot 1. This is the only possible location for the trash

18.253

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 21
enclosure that complies with meets Public Works refuse service standards and that avoids constraints such as steep slopes and heritage trees.

31. If a commercial development bonus is requested, the project complies with the requirements of Section 24.16.258, the city has approved the partnered housing agreement, and the bonus has been mutually agreed upon by the city and the commercial developer.

The project does not request a commercial development bonus; therefore, this finding does not apply.

32. If the housing development or the commercial development is in the coastal zone, any requested density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, modification, modified parking standard, or commercial development bonus is consistent with all applicable requirements of the certified Santa Cruz local coastal program, with the exception of density.

The project site is not in the Coastal Zone; therefore, this finding does not apply.

Heritage Tree Removal Permit, Resolution No. NS-23, 710

33. Alteration of a heritage tree or shrub would only affect less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the crown of said heritage tree or heritage shrub; Fourteen heritage trees are proposed for complete removal; therefore, this finding does not apply.

34. Findings by the Director of Parks & Recreation can be established in conformity with the City’s Urban Forest and Wildland Interface Policy Statement; The trees are located in the urban forest and in the wildland-urban interface. The proposed removal of trees is consistent with this policy statement in that minimizes removal to those in poor condition or those that must be removed due to location within the project footprint, thus retaining the maximum number of trees given the proposed project. In addition, removal of trees in close proximity to the proposed building is consistent with wildland-urban interface policy to provide for defensible space around residential structures.

18.254

AGENDA REPORT
ZA Meeting of October 4, 2023
SUBJECT: 900 High Street – Project No. CP22-0164
PAGE 22
An Arborist report prepared by Kurt Fouts dated September 25, 2022, inventoried the trees in the project area, including 33 heritage trees. The report recommended removal of 14 heritage trees. Six of the heritage trees recommended for removal due to their condition.

Submitted by:

Brittany Whitehill
Senior Planner
Approved by:

Michael Ferry
Senior Planner
Attachments:

1. Exhibit “A” – Conditions of Approval

2. CEQA Exemption Checklist

3. Project plans

4. Geotechnical report prepared by Dees and Associates, dated March 2023

5. Archeological Reconnaissance Study prepared by Albion Environmental, dated June 2019

6. Biotic Reports prepared by Ecosystems West Consulting Group, dated July 2019, May 2020, and January 2023

7. Arborist report prepared by Kurt Fouts dated November 2021, with follow-up letter dated February 2022

8. Noise assessment study prepared by Edward L Pack Associates Inc. dated December 2021

9. Trip Generation Memo prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated December 2022

10. Vehicle Miles Travelled Memo prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated November 2022

11. CEQA Notice of Exemption

12. Public Correspondence

18.255

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
City Hall
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
Regular Meeting
Summary
October 4, 2023
10:00 A.M. GENERAL BUSINESS AND MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST, COUNCIL

CHAMBERS
Please note: As of March 1, 2023, participation in meetings for City Advisory Bodies is in-person only. Members of the public can continue to stream the audio for the meetings from the City’s website, however public comment will no longer be taken virtually and those wishing to address the board must be in attendance at the location provided on the agenda.

The City of Santa Cruz does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Out of consideration for people with chemical sensitivities, we ask that you attend fragrance free. Upon request, the agenda can be provided in a format to accommodate special needs. Additionally, if you wish to attend this public meeting and will require assistance such as an interpreter for American Sign Language, Spanish, or other special equipment, please call the Planning Office at (831) 420-5110 at least five days in advance so that we can arrange for such assistance, or email [email protected]. The Cal-Relay system number: 1-800-735-2922.

Any writing related to an agenda item for the open session of this meeting distributed to the Zoning Administrator less than 72 hours before this meeting is available for inspection at the City Planning Department, 809 Center Street, Room 101 or on the City’s website at www.cityofsantacruz.com. These writings will also be available for review at the Zoning Administrator meeting in the public review binder located at the rear of the Council Chambers.

APPEALS: Any person who believes that a final action of this advisory body has been taken in error may appeal that decision to the City Council. Appeals must be in writing, setting forth the nature of the action and the basis upon which the action is considered to be in error, and addressed to the City Council in care of the City Clerk.

A written notice of appeal, together with the fee of seven hundred forty-one dollars ($741), with the exception of development projects which are appealable to the Coastal Commission where no fee will be charged, must be received by the City Clerk within ten (10) calendar days following the date of the action from which such appeal is being taken.

Call to Order 10:01 a.m., Zoning Administrator: Samantha Haschert Oral Communications - None
Announcements - None

18.256
Approval of Minutes

1. Approval of minutes from the September 20, 2023 meeting.

Recommendation: That the Zoning Administrator approve the minutes from the September 20, 2023 meeting.

Zoning Administrator Action: The Zoning Administrator approved the minutes for the September 20, 2023 meeting.

Consent Agenda

2. Harbor Village Common Area Project Number: CP23-0026 APN: 011- 271-48
Coastal Permit to recognize the Emergency Coastal Permit that was issued to remove two heritage-sized trees (one large Eucalyptus and one Oak) from the Woods Creek Riparian Corridor located within the Harbor Village Common Area on a parcel in the R-L/CZ-O (Multiple Residence - Low-Density District/Coastal Zone Overlay) zone districts. Environmental Review: Categorical Exemption; Applicant: J. Ryan; Filed: 3/21/2023. This project requires a Coastal Permit which is appealable to the California Coastal Commission (CCC). An appeal may be filed to the CCC after all possible local appeals are exhausted through the City. For Coastal Permits processed concurrently with other planning entitlements, an appeal of the Coastal Permit only may be filed directly to the CCC at any time during the appeal period. Appeals shall be processed in accordance with Section 24.04.180, et seq. of the City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code.

Recommendation: That the Zoning Administrator acknowledge the environmental determination and approve the Coastal Permit based on the findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”.

Zoning Administrator Action: The Zoning Administrator approves Item Number 2 on the consent agenda, acknowledges the environmental determination, and approves the following permit(s): Coastal Permit based on the findings and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”, with the following revision(s):
• Update to Condition Number 10 to include “within six months of the approval of the Coastal Permit”.

18.257

3. 1011 Laurent Street Project Number: CP23-0051 APN:006-103-08 Residential Demolition Authorization Permit and Design Permit to demolish an existing single-family dwelling unit and accessory building and to construct a new two-story single-family dwelling unit over three-thousand square feet on a parcel located in the R-1-5 (Single Family Residential) zone district.

Environmental Review: Categorical Exemption; Applicant: C. Prograce; Filed:
04/07/2023.

Recommendation: That the Zoning Administrator acknowledge the environmental determination and approve the Residential Demolition Authorization Permit and Design Permit to demolish an existing single-family dwelling unit and accessory building and to construct a new two-story singlefamily dwelling unit over three-thousand square feet, based on the attached Findings and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”.

Zoning Administrator Action: The Zoning Administrator approves Item Number 3 on the consent agenda, acknowledges the environmental determination, and approves the following permit(s): Residential Demolition Authorization Permit and Design Permit based on the findings and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A.”
Public Hearings

4. 900 HIGH ST Project Number: CP22-0164 APN: 001-022-40 Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to divide a lot into two lots and construct a 40 unit (including four Low Income units and five Very Low Income units), five-story apartment building within 20 feet of a 30 percent slope and to remove 14 heritage trees on a site with an existing church in the R-1-10 (Single Family Residence) zone district. Environmental Determination:

Statutory Exemption; Applicant: Diana Alfaro; Filed: 11/30/2022 Recommendation: That the Zoning Administrator acknowledge the environmental determination and approve the Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”.

The Zoning Administrator opened the public comment period at 10:11 a.m.

The applicant Sibley Simon addressed the public.

18.258
There was 15 members of the public that spoke: David Pattee, Carl Maltzehu, Kari Hansen, Anne Rogers, Elaine Johnson, Gary Benito, Lisa Johnson, Deborah Elston, Marcela Simonlwra, Ken Rodkey, Ken Thomas, Eli Hollidrey, Eli Karon, Catherine Sarto, and Jim Weller.

The Zoning Administrator closed the public comment period at 10:55 a.m.

Zoning Administrator Action: The Zoning Administrator acknowledges the environmental determination, and approves the following permit(s): Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the findings and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A”, with the following revision(s):
• Removal of Condition Number 19: “Replacement trees shall be planted prior to issuance of occupancy permits (including temporary occupancy).”
• Update to new Condition Number 30 to include the revised Section

24.16.010 of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Update to new Condition Number 32 to replace “property owner’s submittal” with “applicant’s submittal”.
• Addition of new Condition Number 37: “All best management practices noted in the June 2019 Biotic Assessment, prepared by EcoSystems West Consulting Group shall be implemented for the duration of the construction period”.
• Update to Condition 39 to add “residential” density, “current” General Plan, and “or amended/future General Plan”.

The appeal period will end on Monday, October 16, 2023.

Adjournment 11:05 a.m.

18.259
From: Lola Quiroga
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 12:32:56 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

It is past time to get this project underway so that more people can have access to affordable housing in Santa Cruz. This project is in an ideal spot, located on a frequent bus line and within biking and walking distance to the UCSC campus. These units would allow more people to live closer to where they work, learn, and play.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Lola
California

18.260
From: Bonnie Bush
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Letter for Feb 13 council meeting on Peace Village from Affordable housing NOW Date: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:15:40 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Scan.pdf
Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center St., Room 8, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: 831-420-5035
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.cityofsantacruz.com
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

Please note: Public Record Act Requests submitted via email, fax, USPS, or dropoff after 5:00 p.m. on a business day, Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays will be processed as received on the next open business day. The 10-day response period begins when the request is received.

From: Tim willoughby <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 1:10 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter for Feb 13 council meeting on Peace Village from Affordable housing NOW

18.261

18.262
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:51 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: 900 High Street - Peace Village - Questions and Concerns From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 7:47 AM
To: Bill Lee <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 900 High Street - Peace Village - Questions and Concerns Hi Bill,
These paths are intended to remain and be improved. There is no existing or proposed public access easement through the 900 High Street project site, and the project is not required to provide public access, however the church has indicated that they intend to continue informally allowing use of the paths.

Brittany Whitehill, AICP
Senior Planner, Current Planning
City of Santa Cruz | Planning and Community Development 809 Center St, Room 107, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: 831-420-5134
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.cityofsantacruz.com

From: Bill Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 7:02 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 900 High Street - Peace Village - Questions and Concerns Hi Brittany:

One more question.

Currently there are two pedestrian accesses from High Street up to UCSC via the faculty housing.

Once access goes thru Westlake School and thru a gate which is sometimes locked The other is thru the 900 High street property.

Does the Peace Village project include pedestrian access from High Street up to UCSC via the faculty housing ?

18.263
2 Bill Lee
Santa Cruz office of Yachtfinders/Windseakers
www.fastisfun.com
831 345 5542

18.264
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Peace Village

From: Dana Bagshaw <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2024 1:40 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Peace Village
Hello Brittany,
I look forward to seeing this well thought-out addition to housing in Santa Cruz moving forward.

Dana Bagshaw

18.265
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 4:22 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 25 co-living bedrooms and 34 units ranging from studios to three-bedroom homes, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so our communities can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our communities.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
K. Perlman
[email protected]

18.266
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 4:24 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street.

The project's design, with 25 co-living bedrooms and 34 units ranging from studios to three-bedroom homes, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

We need more housing of all types in Santa Cruz, and this project puts relatively affordable homes where they are especially needed, near UCSC and in a high opportunity neighborhood.

Please uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so our communities can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our communities.

Sincerely,
Henry Hooker
[email protected]

18.267
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2024 7:40 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
christine morgan
[email protected]

18.268
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:37 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Patricia Guevara
[email protected]

18.269
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:53 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:47 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Obviously, I am just signing on to a pre-written thing but this seems to be a perfect project! Sincerely,

18.270
2 Robin McDuff
[email protected]

18.271
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 4:49 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Kevin Cummings
[email protected]

18.272
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

This is exactly the type of new housing Santa Cruz County needs to meet the State's mandate. The Peace United Church has stepped up and provided the land. Those opposing this project have no legitimate argument and take advantage of every loophole they can find to force additional delays.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

18.273
2 Sincerely,
katherine Genesy
[email protected]

18.274
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 5:11 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Kate Conley
[email protected]

18.275
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Strong support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 5:33 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Strong support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am a community resident, former board member of Coastal Community Preschool (colocated at Peace United Church), and local homeowner who feels that it is crucial that others are afforded safe and secure housing. I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street.

This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Graham Freeman
[email protected]

18.276
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:54 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 5:47 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Kayla Kumar
[email protected]

18.277
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 6:12 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Linda Wilshusen
[email protected]

18.278
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Housing Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 7:36 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Housing Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church of Christ, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six fourbedroom co-living units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Bill Walton
[email protected]

18.279
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:55 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Housing in Santa Cruz needs everyone's help and flexibility -----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 7:47 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing in Santa Cruz needs everyone's help and flexibility Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Dee Roe
[email protected]

18.280
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 8:35 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Karen Scott
[email protected]

18.281
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 9:33 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Carmen L. Martinez
[email protected]

18.282
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:56 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 10:44 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Chelsea Muller
[email protected]

18.283
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:57 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 12:01 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Richard Gallo
[email protected]

18.284
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:44 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Brenda Whitley
[email protected]

18.285
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 6:27 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Beck
[email protected]

18.286
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Please support Peace Village
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 8:11 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Please support Peace Village
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am a resident of the upper Westside and my kids went to Westlake Elementary School. I was also on the School Site Council for Westlake and am very familiar with the proposed location for Peace Village. This is a project our community needs desperately, at a site that is relatively low impact to neighbors.

This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Ami Chen Mills
[email protected]

18.287
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 8:25 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Lisa Ferrone
[email protected]

18.288
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 8:49 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
christine morgan
[email protected]

18.289
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 1:59 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:22 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom coliving units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Cameron
2235 Ocean Street Ext
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Cameron
[email protected]

18.290
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 2:00 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Do not approve Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 11:03 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Do not approve Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong concern for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is a true blight on the Santa Cruz landscape with it's boxy hideous design that is an eyesore for it's own sake but also ruins the viewshed of neighbors. It is not a "balanced response to our community's housing crisis".

Please send these owners back to the drawing board for a design that is in keeping with the prevailing style of the neighborhood.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Anita Grunwald
Sincerely,
Anita Louise Grunwald
[email protected]

18.291
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 2:00 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 11:59 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my continued support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

As one who grew up in the nearby neighborhood and still lives in Santa Cruz, I am acutely aware of the need for more affordable housing options. The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options in the High Street neighborhood. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three one-bedroom units, 15 twobedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one five-bedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can get to work and benefit from the housing relief that this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and efforts to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
James Goodrich

18.292
2 Sincerely,
James Goodrich
[email protected]

18.293
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brittany Whitehill
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2024 2:00 PM
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 12:36 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. Santa Cruz desperately needs this, and more affordable projects.

It is a balanced response to a range of housing needs, from a partnership between local church, design, and development entities.

The project fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements. Please deny the appeal so the city can benefit from the housing this project provides.

Thank you for your time and dedication.

Sincerely,
Henry Hooker
[email protected]

18.294
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 10:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Dear Mayor Keeley and Members of the City Council:

I am wriƟng to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was unanimous in denying an appeal of the project. Peace Village helps address our community's pressing need for more housing, including more units of affordable housing than required by City ordinance.

The collaboraƟon between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes will provide 40 units of rental housing on the upper west side, which has seen very liƩle new rental housing in the past two decades.

The diverse range of units include 11 studios, 3 one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; 4 three-bedroom units, 6 four-bedroom co-living units; and 1 five-bedroom co-living unit. This project offers a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejecƟon of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your Ɵme and dedicaƟon to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Speed
Speed Leas
Box 2250
Boulder Creek CA 95006
Office 831-338-1024
Cell 831-334-5965
[email protected]

18.295
From: Liz DeFrancesco
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote yes on "Peace Village"
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 11:15:48 AM
Dear City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street.

The individuals who are working on this project have worked diligently to make this project conform to all the necessary regulations whilst still creating a beautiful and MUCH needed housing units for the City of Santa Cruz. With ALL of the housing requirements from Governor Newsom, this project will help the city meet these regulations from a grass roots level.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Liz DeFrancesco

18.296
From: Sandy Schuller
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village Housing Support
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 11:19:58 AM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

We are writing to express our strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was unanimous in denying an appeal of the project. Peace Village helps address our community's pressing need for more housing, including more units of affordable housing than required by City ordinance.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes will provide 40 units of rental housing on the upper west side, which has seen very little new rental housing in the past two decades. The diverse range of units include 11 studios, 3 one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; 4 three-bedroom units, 6 four-bedroom co-living units; and 1 five-bedroom co-living unit. This project offers a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sandy and Art Schuller
Peace United Church of Christ Members
Sandy Schuller
Executive Team - Administrative Director
Ensemble Monterey Chamber Orchestra

18.297
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Peter Klotz-Chamberlin <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 11:43 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village project
Dear Members of the Santa Cruz City Council,
I ask you to approve the Peace Village housing project put forth by the long established Peace Church and a nonprofit developer. This is exactly the sort of creative housing project the city needs—of course many more of them!
I support everything Susan Thistlewaite wrote in her Sentinel op ed today, February 8, 2024.

I urge every member of the Santa Cruz City Council to vote to approve this project, as did every member of the Planning Commission.

The project creatively combines mandated affordable housing with sub-market housing, PLUS commitment to accept Section 8 housing vouchers.

Almost all of you ran for office advocating affordable housing. Here is another great chance to vote your message.

Thank you,
Peter Klotz-Chamberlin
112 Peyton Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

18.298
From: Alex Santiago
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 12:14:05 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Alex
California

18.299
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Janet Reed <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 12:52 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village Housing Project
I’m writing to support the Peace Village Housing Project and to ask the Council to allow this much needed project to proceed. As a 50 year resident of West Side Santa Cruz I understand the concern of many about the changing nature of our community. Continuous change has been a feature of the last 50 years. Attempts to limit growth and preserve green space, while laudable, have had unintended consequences. We are now in a position where we must find creative ways to house people or the State will make the decisions for us.

The Peace Village project will provide thoughtfully designed much needed housing and I urge the Council to allow this project to proceed.

Sincerely,
Janet Reed
Sent from my iPad

18.300
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Brian Voegtlen <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 1:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: peace village
City Council,
I think the so called Peace Village housing Project behind Peace United church is a good plan and I support it. We need more affordable housing in santa Cruz!! Thank you for reading,
Brian Voenell
526 Lincoln St. Santa Cruz

18.301
From: Olivia Neuville
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 2:08:38 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Olivia
California

18.302
From: Tram Dinh
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 3:34:19 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Tram
California

18.303
From: John Hall
To: City Council; Fred Keeley
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 4:40:27 PM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I live on the upper west side of Santa Cruz, where, so far as I can see, very little rental housing — much less affordable rental housing — has been built in the past two decades or more. I have heard teachers and staff at Westlake Elementary School and Coastal Community Preschool raise concerns about whether they will be able to continue to work in Santa Cruz. One said she commutes from San Jose.

Having housing near where people work and go to school is a central basis on which to address the crisis of climate change, by reducing commute times.

In addition, our community faces both a general housing crisis and a crisis of homelessness. Typical stereotypes of the homeless do not seem to fit the many homeless people forced onto the street simply because they cannot afford rent payments, too often, even with paying jobs. In short, the general need for housing, including affordable housing, in Santa Cruz is starkly obvious. Peace Village will create more than the legally required amount of affordable housing as part of the proposed 40 units.

Less often discussed is the question of where new housing can and should be built. Peace Village is a proposed development that will create new rental housing on open land in a part of the city with an obvious shortage.

The Peace Village proposal has been approved by the Zoning Administrator.

The Planning Commission has denied an appeal of the project. As far as I can see from the staff report included in the agenda for the 2/13/2024 City Council hearing on the project, there is no legal basis for the appeal to be sustained.

I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

John Hall
. . . . . . . .

John Hall
[email protected]

18.304
From: Zoë Carter
To: Brittany Whitehill; City Council
Cc: Diana Alfaro; Sibley Simon
Subject: SCCBC Letter of Support 900 High Street
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 5:01:58 PM
Hi Brittany,
Please find the attached letter of support from the Santa Cruz County Business Council for 900 High Street, being heard by the City Council on Tuesday. Let me know if anything else is needed. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PwLan9Jgmrz09QpsY_y4OekY9L0fyHdArHOdCsfdxvs/edit? usp=sharing
Best,
Zoe
--
Zoë G. Carter
Executive Director
Santa Cruz County Business Council
831-588-6173
Sign up for our newsletter!

18.305
Santa Cruz City Council
809 Center Street, Room 10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
[email protected]
February 08, 2024
Dear Mayor Keeley and Councilmembers ,
On behalf of the Santa Cruz County Business Council, I write to express our support for the Peace Village Housing Project located at 900 High Street and respectfully request your “aye” vote for the project.

The Santa Cruz County Business Council (SCCBC) was founded in 1996 to provide a collective voice for countywide business owners and executives. Our large and growing number of members practices informed advocacy for countywide businesses and communities. As Santa Cruz County undergoes a profound period of recovery and growth, we strive to be leaders of projects, policies and practices that promote economic and community vitality. The Peace Village Housing Development is one of those projects.

During a past Board of Directors meeting, members, and guests heard directly from the project application and engaged in a rich discussion on housing needs in Santa Cruz - one of which is apartment rental units consisting of co-living spaces and varied size homes for students, young professionals, and low income and very low income residents, among others. The Board of Directors also appreciated that the project was designed to take natural advantage of the sloped hillside and will maximize the outdoor space for residents.

The SCCBC appreciates the creativity of New Way Homes, Workbench and Peace United Church to think outside the box in working towards more affordable housing solutions for the area. We believe that projects such as this one will help ease the housing crisis being experienced in the region. The project meets the mark on many things needed for sustainable development, adds many types of living spaces and also affordable units to contribute to the fulfillment of our RHNA goals.

It provides housing that is critical to attracting and retaining qualified professionals for a sustainable local workforce.

We are grateful for strong and enlightened leadership in addressing our local housing crisis.

Approval of 900 High Street will set an enormous precedent for smart and creative development, and a thriving Santa Cruz economy. We urge you to support this important project.

Sincerely,

18.306
Zoe Carter
Executive Director
Santa Cruz County Business Council

18.307
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: Doug Owen <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 8:05 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Dear Council,
I’m writing in support of the Peace Village project at Peace United Church of Christ in Santa Cruz. As you know, it has passed all the benchmarks, and the development team has addressed the concerns of the latest appeal (which appears groundless). We hope you will approve the project, and if there is anything you can do to discourage and even forestall any further appeals, or legal action that will delay the project, please take that action! The community will be grateful!
Sincerely,
Doug Owen
831-566-0676
[email protected]
Sent from my iPhone

18.308
1 Rosemary Balsley
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2024 8:12 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I am writing to express support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street.

As you know, This project has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was unanimous in denying an appeal of the project. Peace Village helps address our community's pressing need for more housing, including more units of affordable housing than required by City ordinance.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more needed housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to helping provide housing and affordable housing Santa Cruz, Liz Klotz-Chamberlin
112 Peyton St. SC CA 95060
831-251-4330

18.309
From: Ingrid Parker
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 11:41:24 PM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I am a long-time resident of the upper West Side, having lived in UCSC’s employee housing neighborhood since 1998. I am also a member of Peace United Church of Christ, and I am committed to both social justice and a compassionate but data-driven approach to solving our housing crisis.

I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street.

I believe that this housing project is important for our city and will be good for our neighborhood. I believe we should be helping to house the workforce that is so important for Santa Cruz and for the West Side. I believe these housing units will make wonderful homes for Westlake and Mission Hill school teachers, university staff, and young families whose children will be able to walk to school and to enjoy the open spaces at Westlake Pond and Pogonip Park.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes is innovative and visionary, yet also level-headed and fiscally responsible; it offers a balanced response to our community’s housing crisis. The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements.

I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead.

Thank you for your support!
Sincerely,
Ingrid M. Parker
516 Hagar Court
Santa Cruz

18.310
From: karen cozza
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2024 11:51:49 PM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I strongly support the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was unanimous in denying an appeal of the project. Peace Village helps address our community's pressing need for more housing, including more units of affordable housing than required by City ordinance and it provides housing close to employment centers such as West Lake school and UCSC reducing commutes.

The serious housing problem in Santa Cruz will be improved with the addition of 40 units of rental housing on the upper west side. This area has had very little new rental housing in the past two decades. The diverse range of units include 11 studios, 3 one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; 4 three-bedroom units, 6 four-bedroom co-living units; and 1 fivebedroom co-living unit. This project offers a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project meets all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your support!
Karen Cozza
214 Vista Bella Dr
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
--

18.311
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:35:15 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 2:39 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
David Foster
[email protected]

18.312
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Housing in Santa Cruz needs everyone"s help and flexibility Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:35:40 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:38 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing in Santa Cruz needs everyone's help and flexibility Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Dee Roe
[email protected]

18.313
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:35:59 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 6:23 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Amy Argenal
[email protected]

18.314
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:36:14 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 8:12 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Zennon Ulyate-Crow
[email protected]

18.315
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:41:35 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 8:31 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Shanti Zunes-Wolfe
[email protected]

18.316
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:42:36 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 9:14 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Nanlouise Wolfe
[email protected]

18.317
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 7:43:01 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 10:34 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Christine Voenell
[email protected]

18.318
From: elizabethschilling
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 8:11:15 AM
Dear City Council Members,
Peace Village is a wonderful project. Neighbors have appealed the city’s previous approval of the application and I hope you also vote to deny the appeal before you.

The 40 units in the project are creatively arranged and include housing opportunities for students, seniors and even a large family with its 3 bedroom unit. I have lived here 58 years and am excited about having an option such as Peace Village to consider for my housing needs as I grow older.

This proposal allows you to execute your desire to respond to the need for more and varied housing in Santa Cruz. Please deny the appeal and let the project proceed.

Elizabeth Schilling
2261 Juan Pablo Lane
95062

18.319
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 8:21:47 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 8:07 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I live in the upper Westside neighborhood and I completely support the proposed construction of Peace Village.

High Street is already a major access road to UCSC that will not be greatly affected by new homes. In fact, it is likely that some of the families (bravo for including family sized units!) will be using the very assessable transit system.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Melinda Ellestad
[email protected]

18.320
From: Eileen Murphy
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Friday, February 09, 2024 11:56:30 AM
Hello City Council members,
I live in the Westlake area of Santa Cruz and am a member of Peace UCC. I support the Peace Village project. It provides much needed housing and affordable housing in an area that has good access to UCSC and the community. The project is well-planned and well-designed to fit into our neighborhood. I think it will be an asset to where I live with my family! Thanks for your time and consideration.

Best, Eileen Murphy
Moore Street, Santa Cruz

18.321
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Appeal of 900High St. Proposal
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:47:44 AM
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 4:28 PM
To: Renee Golder <[email protected]>; Sandy Brown <[email protected]>; Sonja Brunner <[email protected]>; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson <SKalantari[email protected]>; Scott Newsome <[email protected]>; Martine Watkins <[email protected]>; Fred Keeley <[email protected]> Cc: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: Appeal of 900High St. Proposal
Dear City Council Members, and Mayor Keeley
cc: Brittany Whitehill, AICP; Jim Weller
I urge every member of the City Council to support the development on 900 High Street by approving the draft Resolution denying the appeal. The development of affordable apartments in this location by Peace United Church and the nonprofit developer are in alignment with the City’s goals and policies in the newly adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element, (as noted in the Agenda Report Summary Sheet).

As a volunteer with Santa Cruz Welcoming Network who assists asylum seekers and recent refugees to safe housing, citizenship, employment and education, I applaud this development’s plans to provide low-income and very-low-income housing units.

As a 30+ year Westside resident, I am proud of our city embracing affordable housing in all our neighborhoods.

The staff have addressed each of the appeal issues. The project was approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the project. Peace Village provides an affordable housing plan consistent with the SC Municipal Code. The church is a good neighbor, has met with neighbors, has not claimed the maximum allowable unit number, and has even agreed to more strident conditions of approval to show their commitment to the neighborhood.

This is a project we can all be proud of.

Thank you,
Ellen Fitzgerald Murtha
[email protected]
Virus-free.www.avg.com

18.322
From: Alexis Konevich
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 5:18:26 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Alexis
California

18.323
From: Kayla Kumar
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 6:18:56 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Kayla
California

18.324
From: Tram Dinh
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 6:32:35 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Tram
California

18.325
From: geri Lieby
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 7:16:08 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.
geri
California

18.326
From: Caroline Lamb
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 7:17:28 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing to support proposed housing project at 900 High Street. Not only do I believe that this will fill an important housing need in our community, I also think that it makes sense to put more housing near campus. We have supported this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes. Thank you.

Caroline
California

18.327
From: Monica Larenas
To: City Council
Subject: Urging support of Peace Village project
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 7:21:52 PM
Dear Mayor Keely and Santa Cruz City Council Members,
I write in strong support of the Peace Village development proposed on High Street. It is an outstanding example of mixed affordable housing that we should be scrambling to support as a whole city. It has a creative mix of different sized units that will add critically needed housing for our residents.

I have lived in the Seabright neighborhood (for almost 30 years) where we have many infill projects in the works. I’m glad to see that other areas of Santa Cruz are possibly getting some needed in-fill developments. All neighborhoods need to do our share in supporting these kinds of developments.

I hope you all support this project.

Most sincerely,
Monica
Monica Larenas
215 Darwin Street • Santa Cruz • California 95062

18.328
From: Randa Solick
To: City Council
Subject: Community Feedback
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 8:07:06 PM
On Tuesday, please vote in favor of the peace village development. Our whole community so much needs more affordable housing. Thank you.

18.329
From: Suzanne McLean
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 10:57:13 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Suzanne
California

18.330
From: Hope Armstrong
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2024 11:00:10 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Hope
California

18.331
From: Pauline seales
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 7:27:26 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Pauline
California

18.332
From: natasha
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 7:33:50 AM
To the City Council:

I’m writing in support of the Peace Village. It will provide badly needed rental units, including affordable and coliving. Peace United Church has thoughtfully developed this project. Our city badly needs projects like this and the planning commission has done due diligence in addressing concerns.

Please let this development be built.

Thank you,
Natasha Fraley
524 Bellevue St.

Santa Cruz, 95060
Sent from my iPad

18.333
From: [email protected]
To: City Council
Subject: Support Housing at 900 High St
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 9:28:58 AM
Dear City Council Members, and Mayor Keeley
cc: Brittany Whitehill, AICP
Re: Appeal of 900High St. Proposal
I urge every member of the City Council to support the development on 900 High Street by approving the draft Resolution denying the appeal. The development of affordable apartments in this location by Peace United Church and the nonprofit developer are in alignment with the City’s goals and policies in the newly adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element, (as noted in the Agenda Report Summary Sheet).

As a 30+ year Westside resident, I am proud of our city embracing affordable housing in all our neighborhoods.

This is a project we can all be proud of.

Thank you,
Ellen Fitzgerald Murtha
111 Anderson St.

Santa Cruz, CA. 95060
[email protected]
Virus-free.www.avg.com

18.334
From: Santa Cruz YIMBY
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Bush; Brittany Whitehill
Subject: Santa Cruz YIMBY: Deny the Appeal of Peace Village - Agenda #18, Feb 13, 2024 Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 10:21:50 AM
Attachments: Santa Cruz YIMBY-Deny Appeal-Agenda18-Feb13.pdf Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Councilmembers,
Please see our attached letter urging you to deny the appeal of Peace Village (Agenda #18 on Feb 13th).

Sincerely,
Hope Armstrong
Elizabeth Madrigal
Ryan Meckel
Janine Roeth
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Leads, Santa Cruz YIMBY

18.335
February 11, 2024
To: Santa Cruz City Council
Re: Agenda item #18 - Appeal of 900 High Street: CP23-0164 (APN 001-022-40 Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers.

Santa Cruz YIMBY urges you to deny the appeal of 900 High Street (Agenda Item #18) on your Feb 13, 2024 agenda.

We support the housing project at 900 High Street, also known as Peace Village.

Peace Village is a collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes to create more housing opportunities near UCSC on land that belongs to the church. The property was designed to take advantage of the natural slope of the site and will offer a large amount of open space for its residents.

The project will add 25 co-living bedrooms and 34 homes ranging from studios to three-bedroom homes. 22.5% of the total unit count will be deed-restricted to low and very low-income households.

These homes are a great addition to an area of Santa Cruz that is primarily single family homes. It will add density in a location with access to schools, services, and transportation routes. The project has already been approved twice and we urge you to deny this current appeal to move this project forward.

Santa Cruz YIMBY seeks to build a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. We advocate for abundant housing at all levels of affordability, and support sustainable growth along transportation corridors and a commitment to lower Vehicle Miles Traveled by housing people near services and jobs.

Sincerely,
Hope Armstrong
Elizabeth Madrigal
Ryan Meckel
Janine Roeth
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Leads, Santa Cruz YIMBY
Santa Cruz YIMBY Mission: We envision a community where our neighbors of all ages, cultures, abilities, and incomes, can make Santa Cruz County their home. In response to the ever-increasing cost of living, we advocate for more affordable housing to meet the needs of our growing population.

Santa Cruz YIMBY is a chapter of YIMBY Action, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization.

18.336
From: David Lieby
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal, Please
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 10:31:14 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

David
California

18.337
From: amelia gray
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 11:02:19 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing to voice my strong support for the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to please deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please help move Santa Cruz towards a sustainable future for all our community and deny this appeal Santa Cruz, and all California, is in a housing crisis and we need more homes. amelia
California

18.338
From: Ben Eisenpress
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:12:30 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Ben
California

18.339
From: Emily Kelsey
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 1:43:12 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Emily
California

18.340
From: James Howley
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village Housing Project
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 5:01:04 PM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project has been approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission was unanimous in denying an appeal of the project. Peace Village helps address our community's pressing need for more housing, including more units of affordable housing than required by City ordinance.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

18.341
From: Jaelyn Bos
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 6:17:03 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Jaelyn
California

18.342
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: I support Peace Village
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:46:24 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 10:49 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: I support Peace Village
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Michael Levy
[email protected]

18.343
From: Jaelyn Bos
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Sunday, February 11, 2024 6:17:03 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Jaelyn
California

18.344
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:48:05 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 6:44 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
lynda leigh
[email protected]

18.345
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:48:37 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 8:12 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

I live about 1 mile from the project (at 818 Western Drive) and I think it is important that our neighborhood welcome housing that will bring more affordable housing to our community. I am thrilled that Peace Church is working with New Way Homes on this project. We are in the midst of a housing crisis and further delay on building homes will only make it worse.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Matthew Nathanson
[email protected]

18.346
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:48:57 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 10:27 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. As a member of our community, I understand the importance of thoughtful, community-driven solutions to help address our pressing need for more housing in Santa Cruz County.

Faith communities in public and private partnerships (like the collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes) offer an important and exciting possibility to bring more sustainable housing solutions. The fact is that California has been underbuilding for decades, and we need a lot of solutions to make it work. No single project will address our needs, but the opportunity for faith communities to leverage land and resources is an important possibility to bring forward.

My understanding is that this project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Sarah Marschall Marschall
[email protected]

18.347
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:49:18 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 9:05 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Miriam Stombler
[email protected]

18.348
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:50:05 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:27 PM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Mary Wells
[email protected]

18.349
From: Rafa Sonnenfeld
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 7:28:26 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Rafa
California

18.350
From: Joel Steinberg
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 9:18:47 AM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Joel
California

18.351
From: Susie Land
To: City Council
Subject: Peace Village
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 10:00:40 AM
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes will provide 40 units of rental housing on the upper west side, which has seen very little new rental housing in the past two decades. The diverse range of units include 11 studios, 3 one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; 4 three-bedroom units, 6 four-bedroom co-living units; and 1 five-bedroom coliving unit. This project offers a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

I have been a member of Peace United since 1973 and am proud to say we have helped the community in many ways, but this is the most impactful. It will bring needed housing for teachers and young people who are leaving our city because of no housing that they can afford.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the Zoning Administrator approval and the Planning Commission's rejection of the appeal so that Peace Village can move ahead to bring more housing to Santa Cruz.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Susie Land
831-423-3098
201 Crestview Ter.

Santa Cruz

18.352
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 10:13:05 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 9:26 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
Janie Gleghorn
Sincerely,

JANIE GLEGHORN
[email protected]

18.353
From: Bonnie Bush
To: City Council
Subject: FW: 900 High Street Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 11:40:15 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center St., Room 8, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: 831-420-5035
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.cityofsantacruz.com
Public Records Requests may be submitted online via the Public Records Request form, by email, or by hard copy form available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, CA 95060.

From: Emberson, David Richard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 10:54 AM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>
Cc: Renee Golder <[email protected]>
Subject: 900 High Street Project
Hello,
I am writing to voice my objection to approval of the project at 900 High Street for a 44 unit apartment building. Traffic on High Street is already overwhelming because of a lack of an eastern access road to UCSC, and the project exceeds the density regulations currently in place with existing zoning regulations.

I ask that the City Council reject this proposal.

Very truly yours,
David Emberson
300 Moore Creek Rd.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(831) 212-0339

18.354
From: Brittany Whitehill
To: City Council
Subject: FW: Support for Peace Village Project
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 12:24:44 PM
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 11:56 AM
To: Brittany Whitehill <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for Peace Village Project
Dear Senior Planner Brittany Whitehill,
I am writing to express my strong support for the Peace Village housing project at 900 High Street. This project is crucial in addressing our community's pressing need for more affordable housing.

The collaboration between Peace United Church, Workbench, and New Way Homes presents a thoughtful approach to providing diverse housing options near UCSC. The project's design, with 40 units including 11 studios, three onebedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units; four three-bedroom units, six four-bedroom co-living units; and one fivebedroom co-living unit, reflects a balanced response to our community's housing crisis.

The project has demonstrated that it fulfills all legal, zoning, and geologic requirements while responding to the community's housing needs. I urge you to uphold the zoning administrator and the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal so we can benefit from the housing relief and support this project will bring our community.

Thank you for your time and dedication to shaping the future of Santa Cruz.

Sincerely,
NIta Hertel
[email protected]

18.355
From: Alia Elyas
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Lipscomb; Matt Huerta; Jessica de Wit; Brittany Whitehill Subject: MBEP Peace Village Support Letter
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 1:29:23 PM
Attachments: MBEP Peace Village Support Letter.pdf
Hello,
My name is Alia Elyas and I am turning in the Peace Village Support Letter on behalf of MBEP. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Alia Elyas
--
______________________________
Alia Elyas
Policy and Research Associate | Monterey Bay Economic Partnership 3180 Imjin Road, #153, Marina, CA 93933
Phone: 831-917-5240

18.356
November 29, 2023
City of Santa Cruz Planning Commission
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Subject: Peace Village Project – Support
Dear City of Santa Cruz Planning Commissioners:

Monterey Bay Economic Partnership (MBEP) endorses the Peace Village project proposed by Workbench and New Way Homes. Founded in 2015, MBEP consists of public, private and civic entities located throughout Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz counties with a mission to improve the economic health and quality of life in the Monterey Bay region. Our Housing For All initiative consists of a broad coalition of community members, local employers, and organizations to advocate for and catalyze an increase in housing of all types and income levels in the region.

Peace Village, characterized by its innovative approach and commitment to inclusivity, is a testament to progressive urban development. The project offers a diverse mix of 40 rental homes including studios and two to five-bedroom apartments. Its affordability exceeds City inclusionary housing requirements by allocating 10% of its units to Very Low Income families and an additional 12.5% to Low Income households. This mix caters to a broad spectrum of the community, making it a viable option for students, low-income renters, and families – especially in a strategic location close to educational institutions and public transport. Adding high-density homes meets immediate housing needs and also contributes to the long-term vitality and sustainability of the community.

Workbench and New Way Homes have demonstrated how innovative design and a commitment to inclusivity can create vibrant, diverse communities in a coveted location near downtown Santa Cruz. I urge you to support this transformative project by accepting staff recommendation to deny the zoning administrator appeal and allowing Peace Village to move forward.

Sincerely,
Tahra Goraya, MA, MPA
President & CEO
3180 Imjin Road, Suite 102
Marina, CA 93933 831.915.2806

18.357
From: James Lloyd
To: City Council; Fred Keeley; Renee Golder; Sandy Brown; Sonja Brunner; Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson; Scott Newsome; Martine Watkins; [email protected]
Cc: Bonnie Bush
Subject: Public comment re 900 High Street, agenda item 18 for 13Feb2024 Council meeting Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:07:02 PM
Attachments: Santa Cruz CC Appeal - 900 High Street - HAA & DBL Letter.pdf Dear Santa Cruz City Council,
Please see attached CalHDF's public comment regarding the appeal of the development proposed at 900 High Street, agenda item 18 for the 13 February 2024 Council meeting.

James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
[email protected]

18.358
Feb 12, 2024
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center St.

Santa Cruz, CA 95060
By Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Re: Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision on the project at 900 High Street Dear City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter as a public comment on agenda item 18 at the 13 February 2024 City Council meeting, an appeal of the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission’s approval of a four-story, 40-unit (including 9 below market rate units) project at 900 High Street. The Housing Accountability Act (Gov.

Code, § 65589.5; the “HAA”) requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant projects except in narrow circumstances. The Council must deny the appeal and approve the project in accordance with state law.

The HAA requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. These findings must be “supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record.” (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(1).) Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the Density Bonus Law (the “DBL”) (Gov. Code § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan, for purposes of the HAA. As staff notes, as a project consistent with the General Plan and that meets all development standards except those modified by density bonus concessions, the project falls within the HAA’s ambit. Thus, the Council must deny the appeal and approve the project unless it makes written health and safety findings as described above – which it cannot do, since the preponderance of the evidence in the record does not support such a finding. The 360 Grand Ave #323, Oakland 94610
www.calhdf.org

18.359
Council must also approve the proposed concessions with respect to increased building heights and stories and a reduced front yard requirement.

As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit; it will bring increased tax revenue, new customers to local businesses, decarbonization in the face of climate crisis – and most importantly, it will reduce displacement of existing residents into homelessness or carbon-heavy car commutes. Projects like this one are especially important in helping our state meet its climate goals. While no single housing development can solve all these problems, the project here is a step in the right direction. CalHDF urges the Council to deny the appeal and approve the project, consistent with both its legal obligations and the City’s economic and environmental interests.

CalHDF is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households.

You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org.

Sincerely,
Dylan Casey
CalHDF Executive Director
James M. Lloyd
CalHDF Director of Planning and Investigations
2 of 2

18.360
From: Alia Elyas
To: City Council
Cc: Bonnie Lipscomb; Matt Huerta; Jessica de Wit; Brittany Whitehill Subject: Re: MBEP Peace Village Support Letter
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:26:41 PM
Attachments: MBEP Peace Village Support Letter 02.12.24 (1).pdf Hello,
I am re-submitting MBEP's Peace Village Support Letter on behalf of MBEP, the previous letter submitted earlier today contained a few minor errors that were corrected. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns and my apologies for any confusion.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Alia Elyas
Sincerely,
Alia Elyas
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:28 PM Alia Elyas <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
My name is Alia Elyas and I am turning in the Peace Village Support Letter on behalf of MBEP. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Alia Elyas
--
______________________________
Alia Elyas
Policy and Research Associate | Monterey Bay Economic Partnership 3180 Imjin Road, #153, Marina, CA 93933
Phone: 831-917-5240

18.361
February 12, 2024
Santa Cruz City Council
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Subject: Peace Village Project – Support
Dear Santa Cruz City Council:

Sincerely,
Tahra Goraya, MA, MPA
President & CEO
3180 Imjin Road, Suite 102
Marina, CA 93933 831.915.2806

18.362
From: Andrew Ow
To: City Council
Subject: Deny the Peace Village Appeal
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:32:22 PM
Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the proposed housing project at 900 High Street and urge you to deny the appeal in order to move affordable housing forward for our community. Santa Cruz community members have repeatedly shown up in force to support this project each time it has come before the city at the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission.

I live a few blocks from the proposed project and my wife or I walk with our son past the project site to and from Westlake Elementary school (which our son attends and which I attended) nearly every school day. We love our neighborhood and our city, both of which desperately need more housing. As was said at the planning commission hearing on this project, let's turn commuters into neighbors.

Please deny this appeal and move this much needed housing forward. Santa Cruz is in a housing crisis and we need more homes.

Andrew
California

18.363

APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF

THE MINOR LAND DIVISION, DESIGN PERMIT, SLOPE

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, DENSITY BONUS REQUEST, AND

HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
Environmental Determination: Statutory Exemption per section 21083.3 of the Public Resources Code (Sec. 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines) 900 High Street
Multi-family Development

18.364
2 Site/Project Information

18.365
3 Previous Meetings and Appeal
Information
• Zoning Administrator Approved on October 4, 2023
 Appealed by Deborah Elston, representing Westlake Neighborhood Association
• Planning Commission Approved on November 30, 2023
 Appealed by Norman Tardif, representing Springtree Homeowners Association and Westlake Neighborhood Association

18.366
4 1. Implementation of Geological Recommendations

2. Proposed density/clustering of residential density on one lot within the project site

3. Future damage to/removal of Heritage trees
Appeal Concerns

18.367
5 1. Removal of Condition of Approval requiring deed
restriction to memorialize clustering

2. Refinements to Conditions of Approval related to
geological and geotechnical recommendations (No. 45
and 46)

3. Additional, more stringent tree protection conditions (No. 20-23)

4. Refinements to Participation Agreement Condition (No. 35)

5. Additional rewording/reordering for clarity
Revised Conditions of Approval

18.368
6 That the City Council adopt a resolution denying the appeal of Norman Tardif, representing Springtree Homeowner’s Association (HOA) and Westlake Neighbors Association, thereby upholding the Planning Commission’s acknowledgement of the environmental determination and approval of the Minor Land Division, Design Permit, Slope Development Permit, Density Bonus Request, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit based on the findings listed below and the Conditions of Approval attached as “Exhibit A.”
Recommendation

18.369
City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 1/25/2024
AGENDA OF: 02/13/2024
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: FY 2024 Budget Adjustments and Information on City’s Financial Status (FN)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution amending the fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget appropriation of expenditures to all funds as listed in Exhibit A, in the amount of $14,274,517, including an increase of $721,206 to the General Fund, and a total appropriation decrease of revenues as listed in Exhibit A in the amount of $10,782,600 to all funds, including a net addition of $358,844 to the General Fund;
2) Authorize the City Manager to allocate budgetary changes within the applicable funds and departments; and
3) Receive an update on the City of Santa Cruz’s financial status, including follow-up analysis for Phase III of the City’s 2021 Compensation Study.

BACKGROUND: On June 13, 2023, the City Council passed resolution NS-30, 164, which adopted a budget for FY 2024. The purpose of this agenda item is to provide a mid-year update on the City’s financial standing and to make adjustments to the FY 2024 budget.

In the normal course of the budget year, adjustments need to be made for administrative corrections and/or cleanup. In some cases, adjustments to the budget are required as departments implement work plans in alignment with the Citywide Strategic Plan or other Council direction.

In other cases, unanticipated needs have arisen, requiring additional appropriations.

The close of the previous fiscal year has been completed and half of the current fiscal year has passed, which means there is helpful information to provide the Mayor and Councilmembers about the City’s current financial status.

Our strategic plan includes the following focus areas:
 Fiscal Sustainability and Transparency
 Strong Business Communities and a Vibrant Downtown
 Housing
 Homelessness Response
 Public Safety and Community Well-Being

19.1.1  Natural and Built Infrastructure
 Thriving Organization
DISCUSSION: A comprehensive list of all the proposed FY 2024 budget adjustments are listed in Exhibit A by the type of adjustment. The first set of budget adjustments are corrections to revenues. The next set of budget adjustments are corrections to expenditures. The remainder of budget adjustments are expenditures with matching revenue.

The corrections to revenues total a decrease in the amount of $14,552,975. The largest piece of this decrease is due to the Water Department accidentally budgeting for future year grant proceeds. The total includes a decrease in General Fund revenues in the amount of $52,384.

This is primarily due to moving the Technology Surcharge from Fund 101 to a new separate fund.

Budget adjustments to expenditures total an increase of $7,490,114. A considerable portion of this increase is due to moving appropriations to a project from fund balance for the anticipated new Citywide Enterprise Resource Planning software in the amount of $3,834,800. Another significant increase is due to the purchase of a building for the Parking Division in the amount of $2,300,000. For the General Fund, the increase is $369,000. This increase is to correct a $300,000 project transfer, and approved budget additions that were missed.

The remainder of budget adjustments are expenditures with matching revenue, with some coming from non-General Fund sources. These include adjustments to the funding for the Homelessness Response Team (HRT) from the remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and the State Homeless Response Program (CA14). The expenditures for the HRT projects were included in the adopted budget, however the revenues were not recognized in the projects. An adjustment adding the funding and purchase of property for the Downtown Affordable Housing Library Project from the Economic Development Trust Fund is needed for that project to continue. There are additions of new grant-funded projects, as well as several miscellaneous corrections. These budget adjustments increase revenues by $3,770,375 and expenditures are $6,784,403. For the General Fund, revenues increased by $411,228 and expenditures increased by $352,206.

One of the City’s Climate Action Program initiatives is the development of a Carbon Fund that enhances the City’s ability to invest in carbon-reducing projects that align with the goals of the plan. Annually, departments submit project proposals that are evaluated by the Sustainability Team, a cross-sector group of employees representing all City departments. This fiscal year, the Carbon Fund awarded a total of $43,000 toward carbon-reducing projects as listed in Exhibit B.

The City Manager’s Office, Police, Fire, Parking, and Library were recipients of this year’s awards.

The budget adjustments relate to the following strategic focus areas: Strong Business Communities and a Vibrant Downtown, Housing, Homelessness Response, and Natural and Built Infrastructure. The cumulative effect of these budget adjustments supports the Health in All Policies (HiAPs) workplan by supporting increased economic vitality; higher levels of selfsufficiency; increased social, economic, and occupational mobility; connection to others; climate

19.1.2 change resiliency; a safe, affordable, and accessible transportation system; and safety of neighborhoods and communities.

Fiscal Sustainability and Transparency: Current Financial Outlook The FY 2023 budget was adopted in June 2022 with a $4.9M deficit to be covered by fund balance. The year closed with a $1.5M deficit due to higher than anticipated tax revenues.

The City adopted a balanced budget of $139M in FY 2024. This was only possible because it did not include the annual $5M transfer to the Capital Investment Program. Halfway through FY 2024, revenues are at 49% of budget, which is expected given the timing of tax receipts.

Expenditures are at 57% of budget.

19.1.3 More broadly, per the update at Council on November 28, 2023, the City’s current ongoing annual fiscal gap averages $10.5M from FY 2025 to FY 2034. The long-range forecast estimates that the City’s General Fund shall, if nothing else is done, fall below its minimum reserve threshold (~17%) by FY 2025, and be depleted by FY 2027. The City is pursuing a significant and sustainable future potential revenue stream on the ballot in March 2024 – a sales tax measure. However, the outcome is not known and, should it pass, it will take months before additional revenue comes into the General Fund. Additionally, the sales tax estimated net of ~$8M to the General Fund only serves to partially offset the average annual gap of $10.5M.

Long-range forecast as of November 2023
Thriving Organization: 2021 Compensation Study Cost Analysis As staff committed at the September 12, 2023 City Council meeting, efforts have been made toward analyzing the feasibility of implementing Phase III of the 2021 Compensation study. On September 12, 2023, City Council approved compensation changes to varying service and supervisory classifications totaling an ongoing cost of $483,668 per year. Prior to City Council approval, the Human Resources Department (HR) reported they would return to Council at midyear to share the estimated cost of implementing Phase III, which included increases for classifications identified in the 2021 Compensation study that are more than ten percent (10%) below market.

The following benchmarked classifications are more than ten percent (10%) below market and are the basis of the cost analysis for Phase III. The 2021 Compensation study identifies benchmarked and mapped classifications. Benchmarked classifications are compared to classifications in other surveyed agencies and determine where classifications place in the market. Benchmarked positions were also mapped to other classifications that were not benchmarked and did not easily fit into a job family or series. Classification are mapped with benchmarked classifications given similar scope and responsibility, typical duties, requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities, supervision received and exercised, and internal relationships.

Table 1 identifies the benchmarked classifications that are more than ten (10%) below market and their associated mapped classifications.

19.1.4 TABLE 1
Classification Title (Benchmarked)
2021 Market
Standing
2021 Mapped Classifications
Analyzed
Increase
Building Inspector -11.10 None Listed 1.1%
Buyer I/II* -22.40 None Listed 12.4%
Chief Ranger** -12.00 None Listed 2.0%
Development Manager -20.40 Economic Development Manager 10.4% Finance Manager -12.50 Purchasing Manager 2.5%
Human Resources Analyst I/II* -10.30 None Listed 0.3%
Police Records Technician -10.70 None Listed 0.7%
Ranger I/II** -12.00 None Listed Ranger Assistant Included 2.0% Senior Ranger -12.00 None Listed 2.0%
Utility Service Representative I/II -12.40 Utility Service Field Technician I/II 2.4% Water Distribution Operator
Trainee/II*/III
-13.90 Wastewater Collection Maintenance
Technician I/II

3.9%
*Benchmarked of Alternately staffed classification.
**Last market standing according to 2017 Compensation Study.

Phase III Methodology/Analytical Approach. The cost analysis includes giving each of the classifications increases as identified in Table 1 and analyzed compaction in the classifications reporting structure. For example, the analyzed increase for the Development Manager would be

10.4% since it is 20.4% below market. Compaction review aims to ensure that classifications with a reporting relationship maintain ten percent (10%) between the top step of the supervisory classification and the top step of the classification being supervised. The cost below includes the increase in salary as well as a 58% increase in benefits to account for all medical and retirement.

Item
Total
Esitmated
Cost
Benchmarked Classifications $ 224,136
Mapped Classifications $ 83,750
Associated Compaction $ 19,557
Total Annual Cost $ 327,443
The City has approximately 287 classifications. Given cost limitations, the 2021 Compensation study benchmarked 84 classifications. Not including mapped classifications, approximately 87 classifications remained unmapped to benchmarked positions, with several operational areas identified as insufficient data, such as the Wharf, Wastewater, and Water, given an inability to find matching surveyed agencies. HR staff analyzed the cost to include unmapped positions. The unmapped classifications included in this analysis were determined by creating pay scales similar to Federal Government pay scales, or General Schedule (GS). The percentage increases the benchmarked and mapped classifications received, identified in Table 1, were then applied to the unmapped classifications.

19.1.5 The following pay bands, delineated as GS and Law Enforcement (LEO) pay scales, were used in order to determine nearby unmapped classifications:

The unmapped classifications identified by pay bands to the benchmarked and mapped classifications in Table 1 include the classifications listed in Attachment 1.

Item
Total
Esitmated
Cost
Unmapped Classifications $ 286,350
Associated Compaction $ 123,630
Total Annual Cost $ 409,980
Based on this methodology, the total analyzed cost for benchmarked, mapped, and unmapped classifications is $737,723 annually.

Considering annual cost with an average cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) given varying bargaining units is as follows:

Estimated Annual Cost and COLA
FY24 + 3% COLA FY25 4% COLA Total – 2 years
$ 759,855 $ 790,249 $ 1.55M

19.1.6 The insights gathered from conversations with staff and from this initial analysis are invaluable and play a crucial role in shaping our employee compensation strategy moving forward, including efforts toward preparing for the 2024 Compensation Study. It is imperative to exercise caution and prudence to ensure the stability and future growth of our organization before committing to significant ongoing costs to our general and enterprise funds. Given the City’s current financial status, Phase III possible action should be deferred until the FY 2025 budget cycle.

The analysis and information supports the Health in All Policies (HiAPs) workplan by supporting Economic Security and Mobility: stable employment, livable wages, food security, ability to afford basic needs, wealth accumulation, and prosperity.

FISCAL IMPACT: Budget adjustments do not include Phase III of the 2021 Compensation study at this time. The above recommendations will result in a FY 2024 total expenditure increase increase of $14,274,517 and a total revenue decrease of $10,782,600. The impact to the General fund is an increase in expenditures of $721,206 and an increase in revenues of $358,844, as listed in Exhibit A.

Prepared By:

Tracy Cole
Finance Manager, Budget
Sara De Leon
People Officer
Submitted By:

Elizabeth Cabell
Finance Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution Appropriating Funds and Amending the FY 2024 Budget

2. Exhibit A – FY 2024 Budget Adjustments

3. Exhibit B – FY 2024 Carbon Fund Projects Memo

4. Unmapped Classifications Included in Analysis by Pay Scale

19.1.7 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ APPROPIATING FUNDS AND AMENDING THE FY 2024 BUDGET
WHEREAS, it is recommended that the adjustment set forth in Exhibit A be made to the present budget appropriations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that the Budget of the City of Santa Cruz, adopted on June 13, 2023 by Resolution No. NS-30,164, and amended as set forth in Exhibit A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to allocate within the applicable Funds and the appropriate accounting classifications and to approve related applicable transfer in/out between funds.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

19.1.8 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
101 Add 101-00-00-0000-46261 Rents - Water land lease 41,342 X Land lease revenues correction 1 101 Add 101-00-00-0000-46262 Rents - Wastewater land lease 36,274 X Land lease revenues correction 2 101 Reduce 101-00-00-0000-49177
From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) (1,287,219) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 3 101 Reduce 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan (4,724,356) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 4 101 Add p102202-991-0-0
Safe Sleeping and Shelter -
Armory 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 3,627,781 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 5 101 Add p102202-992-0-0
Safe Sleeping and Shelter -
Armory 101-00-00-0000-49177
From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) 1,172,219 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 6 101 Add p102207-992-0-0 Transitional Camp 1220 101-00-00-0000-49177 From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) 80,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 7 101 Add p102209-991-0-0 Safe Parking- Tier 1 (Emergency) 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 14,575 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 8 101 Add p102210-992-0-0 Safe Parking- Tier 2 (Overnight) 101-00-00-0000-49177 From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) 15,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 9 101 Add p102211-991-0-0
Safe Parking- Tier 3 (LongTerm/Armory) 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 500,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 10 101 Add p102204-991-0-0 Storage 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 210,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 11 101 Add p102204-992-0-0 Storage 101-00-00-0000-49177
From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) 20,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 12 101 Add p102302-991-0-0 Homeless Response Cleanup 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 230,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 13 101 Add p102311-991-0-0 Temporary Seasonal Shelter 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 142,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 14 101 Reduce 101-50-70-1301-44160
Technology Surcharge for Planning &
Community Development (130,000) X
Technology Surcharge in Fund 101 was moved into a
special fund 295 per City Council Meeting on
6/13/2023 per Resolution No. NS-30,161 15
211 Reduce 211-20-22-2103-43290 State grants - other (200,000) X Budgeted in error 16 295 Add 295-50-00-0000-44160
Technology Surcharge for Planning &
Community Development 175,000 X
New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 17
295 Add 295-14-00-0000-44160 Technology Surcharge for Finance 49,000 X New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 18
295 Add 295-40-00-0000-44160 Technology Surcharge for Public Works 15,000 X New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 19
295 Add 295-70-00-0000-44160 Technology Surcharge for Water 6,800 X New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 20
295 Add 295-21-00-0000-44160 Technology Surcharge for Fire 3,300 X New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 21
COUNCIL MID-YEAR ADJUSTMENTS FY 2024
Revenue Corrections

Page 1 of 9 ends

19.1.9 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
295 Add 295-30-00-0000-44160
Technology Surcharge for Parks and
Recreation 500 X
New Technology Surcharge fund was created per
Resolution No. NS-30,161 per City Council Meeting
on 6/13/2023 22
311 Add c512205-107-0-0 Navigation Center Phase I 311-51-80-9980-46990 Miscellaneous non-operating revenue 15,000 X Budget additional unanticipated miscellaneous
revenue. 23
311 Reduce 311-40-64-9320-43359
Local capital grant-SC County Land
Trust (1,500,000) X Budgeted in error 24
311 Reduce
c402408-216-4000-
0 Active Transportation Plan
Update 311-40-64-9330-43251 State Capital Grants - TDA (49,877) X Local match via staff labor (not TDA). 25 350 Add c402408-963-0-0
Active Transportation Plan
Update 350-00-00-0000-49180 From General Fund CIP Reserve Fund 49,877 X staff labor match 26 341 Reduce 341-00-00-0000-49101 From General Fund (2,000,000) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 27 341 Add c152301 City ERP Replacement 341-00-00-0000-49101 From General Fund 2,000,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 28 751 Add c601403-904
SLR Mouth & Lagoon Mgmt Plan
Devel. 311-00-00-0000-49114 From Storm Water Fund 130,000 X Transferred funds from double budgeted 751-40-61-
7501-54311 (Maintenance - flood control and storm
dr). Additional funds would assist with completion of
the Culvert O&M Manual, repairs to the culvert from
Winter 2023 storms, and procure equipment to
maintaince the infrastructure. 29
711 Reduce 711-70-91-7153-43310
Local Operating Grants and
Contributions (475,000) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 30 711 Add
c701705-127-5025-
0 Water Supply Augmentation 711-70-91-7153-43310
Local Operating Grants and
Contributions 475,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 31 711 Reduce 711-70-91-7151-43310
Local Operating Grants and
Contributions (6,580,000) X Budgeted in error. This is a future year grant. 32 711 Reduce 711-70-91-7153-43193
Local Operating Grants and
Contributions (7,500,000) X Budgeted in error. This is a future year grant. 33 752 add m409505-912-0-0
San Lorenzo River System
Maintenance 752-00-00-0000-49101 From General Fund 300,000 X To correct project transfer budgeted 34 752 Add
c402112-265-2095-
4051 FEMA Levee Certification 752-40-62-7552-43250 State capital grants and contributions 539,834 X CA Dept of Water Res #42 - 90% (Tiffany) 35 752 Add
c409512-265-2095-
4051
SLR Flood Control Environ Rest
Project 752-40-61-7552-43250 State capital grants and contributions 44,976 X CA Dept of Water Res #42 - 90% (Tiffany) 36 TOTAL REVENUE (14,552,975)
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE (52,384)
Revenue Corrections

Page 2 of 9 ends

19.1.10 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
101 Add 101-00-00-0000-59141 To Stormwater Overlay Fund 300,000 X To correct project transfer budgeted 37 101 Add 101-21-32-2203-51130 Other pay 35,000 X adding On-Call pay that was missed at budget 38 101 Add 101-30-40-3101-52150 Merchant bank fees 10,000 X This is a budget neutral correction - with the rebound
from the pandemic our merchant bank fee account
needs to be restored. This was included in our FY24
"Budget Neutral Cost Recovery" decision package
and approved. However, it was never added to our
budget. 39
101 Add 101-30-43-3212-52150 Merchant bank fees 3,000 X This is a budget neutral correction - with the rebound
from the pandemic, this merchant bank fee account
needs to be restored. 40
101 Add 101-30-45-3131-52199
Other professional and technical
services 21,000 X
This is a budget neutral correction - with increased
revenues at the Golf Course, this amount was
requested in our FY24 "Budget Neutral Cost
Recovery" decision package and approved. However,
it was never added to our budget. 41
221 Reduce 221-00-00-0000-59123 (800,000) X Wrong object 42 221 Add 221-00-00-0000-59126 800,000 X Wrong object 43
249 Add 249-00-00-0000-59103 143,000 X Budget missing from adopted budget 44 253 Reduce 253-00-00-0000-59191 (3,019,201) X Wrong object 45 253 Add 253-00-00-0000-59103 3,019,201 X Wrong object 46 279 Reduce
h512405 100 2020
0 Pacific Station North Affordable
Housing 279-51-81-5201-56960 Loans and Grants (250,000) X Funding not needed by project, covered by other
grant sources 47
292 Reduce 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA (1,287,219) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 48 293 Reduce 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 (4,724,356) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 49 293 Add
Safe Sleeping and Shelter -
Armory 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 3,627,781 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 50 292 Add
Safe Sleeping and Shelter -
Armory 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA 1,172,219 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 51 292 Add Transitional Camp 1220 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA 80,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 52 293 Add Safe Parking- Tier 1 (Emergency) 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 14,575 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 53 292 Add Safe Parking- Tier 2 (Overnight) 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA 15,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 54 293 Add
Safe Parking- Tier 3 (LongTerm/Armory) 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 500,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 55 293 Add Storage 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 210,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 56 292 Add Storage 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA 20,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 57 Expenditure Corrections

Page 3 of 9 ends

19.1.11 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
293 Add Homeless Response Cleanup 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 230,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 58 293 Add Temporary Seasonal Shelter 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 142,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 59 311 Add c212306 Fire Station Butler Building 311-21-31-2202-57290 Other Building Costs 144,000 X New Butler Building and concrete pad for Fire Station

3. Concrete pad foundation is required for heavy
equipment storage. 60
311 Add c212303 Fire Station # 3 Generator 311-21-31-2202-57490 Other Machinery and Equipment 25,000 X Previously funded project for a generator at station #

3. A portion of funds were reallocated to purchase
Type 1 Fire Engine and were not returned. This fee
adds back on to current funds in the project to cover
full cost of equipment. 61
311 Reduce 311-40-00-9410-57290 Other building costs (212,492) X Reduce excess expense and match GL to project
actuals. 62
311 New
c601403-100-2020-
0 SLR Mouth & Lagoon Mgmt Plan
Devel. 311-40-00-9145-57106 Land improvements 130,000 X Transferred funds from double budgeted 751-40-61-
7501-54311 (Maintenance - flood control and storm
dr). Additional funds would assist with completion of
the Culvert O&M Manual, repairs to the culvert from
Winter 2023 storms, and procure equipment to
maintaince the infrastructure. 63
311 Add c512205 Navigation Center Phase I 311-51-80-9980-57102 Land 60,000 X Expense for pollution abatement is offset by$15,000/month income received from seller as
damages for not vacating property. Revenue was
added via Admin BA. 64
316 Add 316-00-00-0000-59191 Intra-entity transfer out 120,000 X Additional Measure S funding for Calendar 2024
encumbrance 65
341 Add c152301 City ERP Replacement 341-15-10-9910-57901 Software 3,834,800 X add funding to project for new ERP 66 350 Add 350-00-00-0000-59103 To General Capital Improvement Fund 49,877 X staff labor match 67 721 Add 721-40-65-7203-51XXX Salaries and benefits 7,745 X Delete a WW Fac Mechancial Tech I/II and add a WW
Fac Lead Mechanical Tech; details in HR staff report 68 721 Add 721-40-65-7203-54206 PC replacement program purchases 1,500 X Increase in PC replacement that was missed 69 731 Add 731-40-63-7302-51XXX Salaries and benefits 40,219 X addition of a Solid Waste Worker; details in HR staff
report 70
731 Add 731-40-63-7306-51XXX Salaries and benefits 36,297 X addition of a Waste Reduction Assistant; details in
HR staff report 71
731 New 731-40-63-7302-51114 Overtime 35,000 X
Not included in FY24 budget request. This is an
annual cost for OT at Resource Recovery Collections. 72 731 New 731-40-63-7307-51114 Overtime 10,000 X
Not included in FY24 budget request. This is an
annual cost for OT at Resource Recovery Collections. 73 Expenditure Corrections

Page 4 of 9 ends

19.1.12 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
731 New 731-40-63-7306-51114 Overtime 3,800 X
Not included in FY24 budget request. This is an
annual cost for OT at Resource Recovery Waste
Reduction. 74
741 Add
p402002-100-
2020-0
Transportation Demand Mgmt.

Development 741-40-64-7401-52199 Other professional & technical services 300,000 X The FY24 allocation of $300,000 was inadvertently
left off from the budget request in January 2023. The
Parking Fund provides these funds annually for this
project. 75
741 Add 741-40-**-****-57202 Buildings - purchase 2,300,000 X Purchase building for Parking office 76 751 New
m402401-100-
2020-0
SLR Culvert and River Mouth
Maintenance 751-40-60-7501-54311
Maintenance - flood control and storm
dr 40,000 X
New FY24 maintenance project was accidentally not
processed during the budget season. This action
would be to clean that up and fund the new
maintenance project. Going forward, this project will
be used and the CIP project for the culvert
installation will be closed. 77
751 Add 751-00-00-0000-59103 To General Capital Improvement Fund 130,000 X Transferred funds from double budgeted 751-40-61-
7501-54311 (Maintenance - flood control and storm
dr). Additional funds would assist with completion of
the Culvert O&M Manual, repairs to the culvert from
Winter 2023 storms, and procure equipment to
maintaince the infrastructure. 78
751 Reduce 751-40-61-7501-54311
Maintenance - flood control and storm
dr (130,000) X
This was double budgeted. This has been budgeted
in the appropriate operating projects and was
accidentally also budgeted in the GL (non-project
related). Would like transfer these funds to c601403 79 711 Add 711-70-91-7102-51XXX Salaries and benefits 201,196 X addition of a Associate Planner I/II; details in HR staff report 80
711 Add 711-70-95-7106-51XXX Salaries and benefits 11,172 X Add 5.1% for compaction; details in HR staff report 81 711 Reduce c701606 NCD I/O Replacement Project 711-70-91-7153-57302 Water systems (855,000) X 82 711 Add c700025
GHWTP Facilities Improvement
Project 711-70-91-7152-57302 Water systems 500,000 X 83 711 Add c701505
University Tank 4
Rehab/Replacemen 711-70-91-7153-57302 Water systems 250,000 X 84 711 Add c702202
CMMS Software Replacement
for Water Dept 711-70-91-7159-57901 Water systems 105,000 X 85 945 Add 945-52-80-5510-52149 Interagency labor charges 90,000 X adding labor charges that was missed at budget 86 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 7,490,114

GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE
CORRECTIONS 369,000
Transfer of funds within the Water Dept's CIP after
review of updated estimated actuals for FY2024
Expenditure Corrections

Page 5 of 9 ends

19.1.13 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
221 Reduce
c402304-216-4000-
0 Bay Dr Protected Bike Lanes
and Ped Path 221-40-64-9330-43251 Carryover from TDA (580,000) X Rebudgeting project to correct grant account. 87 221 Add
c402304-113-2273-
0 Bay Dr Protected Bike Lanes
and Ped Path 221-40-64-9330-43268 State capital grants - AHSC 600,000 X Rebudgeting project to correct grant account and
amount. 88
221 Add
c402304-100-2020-
0 Bay Dr Protected Bike Lanes
and Ped Path 221-40-64-9330-57307 Pedestrian/bike systems 20,000 X Rebudgeting project to Grant. 89 291 Reduce 291-40-00-6301-43210
State operating grants and
contributions (1,200,000) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 90 291 Add
g600001-400-4000-
0142 TDA - Transit Purposes 291-40-00-6301-43210
State operating grants and
contributions 1,200,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 91 291 Reduce 291-40-00-6301-56960 Loans and grants (1,200,000) X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 92 291 Add
g600001-100-2020-
0 TDA - Transit Purposes 291-40-00-6301-56960 Loans and grants 1,200,000 X To associate budgeted amount to a project. 93 101 Reduce p102305-991-0-0 Predevelopment Grant 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan (499,430) X Move funding to Navigation Center Phase II 94 311 Add c102303-991-0-0 Navigation Center Phase II 311-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 499,430 X Move funding from Predevelopment Grant 95 101 Reduce
p102305-100-
2020-0 Predevelopment Grant 101-10-16-6105-52199 Other professional & technical services (499,430) X Move funds to Navigation Center Phase II 96 311 Add
c102303-100-2020-
0 Navigation Center Phase II 311-10-16-9980-57990 Other Capital Outlay 499,430 X Predevelopment Grant funds moved to Navigation
Phase II 97
293 Reduce 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 (499,430) X Reduce transfer-out to General Fund 98 293 Add 293-00-00-0000-59103 To General CIP fom CA14 499,430 X Increase transfer-out to General CIP 99 101 Add 101-30-42-3201-44301 Classes 45,000 X
Current projections show an $45,000 increase in
revenues beyond what was in the Adopted Budget. 100
101 Add 101-30-42-3201-52199
Other professional and technical
services 45,000 X
This account pays for class instructors and is
budgeted on the margin until the department can get
a better sense for current fiscal year revenue
performance. Current projections show a $45,000
increase in revenues beyond what was in the
Adopted Budget. This increase will be offset by those
revenues. 101
101 Add 101-30-42-3205-44306 Sports 10,000 X
Current projections show an $10,000 increase in
revenues beyond what was in the Adopted Budget. 102
101 Add 101-30-42-3205-52199
Other professional and technical
services 10,000 X
This account pays for sports officials and is budgeted
on the margin until the department can get a better
sense for current fiscal year revenue performance.

Current projections show a $25,000 increase in
revenues beyond what was in the Adopted Budget.

This increase will be offset by those revenues. 103
101 Add
p511801-408-
5005-0 SC Trolley 101-51-80-5590-46910 Misc Operating 5,500 X Revenue from Trolley Rental & Advertising 104 101 Add
p511801-495-
5010-0 SC Trolley 101-51-80-5590-43310 Local Operating grants 74,500 X funding will come from the Downtown Management
Corporation. 105
Expenditures with off setting Revenue - Net Zero corrections

Page 6 of 9 ends

19.1.14 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
101 Add
p511801 100 2020
0 SC Trolley 101-51-80-5590-52151 Program Services 80,000 X Additional costs for running 2 electric vehicles 106 101 Add p202403-991-0-0 Patrol Electric bicycles 101-00-00-0000-49167 From Carbon Reduction Fund 8,000 X Budget Funding for annual FY24 Carbon Fund
projects 107
741 Add p402002-999-0-0
Transportation Demand Mgmt.

Development 741-00-00-0000-49167 From Carbon Reduction Fund 5,000 X Budget Funding for annual FY24 Carbon Fund
projects 108
101 Add p102402-999-0-0
Change Management
Consultant 101-00-00-0000-49167 From Carbon Reduction Fund 12,000 X Budget Funding for annual FY24 Carbon Fund
projects 109
101 Add p212403-999-0-0
Electric conv. of gas
landscaping equip 101-00-00-0000-49167 From Carbon Reduction Fund 11,000 X Budget Funding for annual FY24 Carbon Fund
projects 110
951 Add p362403-999-0-0 Library Book bike 951-00-00-0000-49167 From Carbon Reduction Fund 7,000 X Budget Funding for annual FY24 Carbon Fund
projects 111
101 Add
p202403-100-
2020-0 Patrol Electric bicycles 101-20-22-2103-52199 Other professional & technical services 8,000 X Budget for annual FY24 Carbon Fund projects 112 741 Add
p402002-100-
2020-0
Transportation Demand Mgmt.

Development 741-40-64-7401-52199 Other professional & technical services 5,000 X Budget for annual FY24 Carbon Fund projects 113 101 Add
p102402-100-
2020-0
Change Management
Consultant 101-10-03-1217-52199 Other professional & technical services 12,000 X Budget for annual FY24 Carbon Fund projects 114 101 Add
p212403-100-
2020-0
Electric conv. of gas
landscaping equip 101-21-31-2202-53105 Small tools and equipment 11,000 X Budget for annual FY24 Carbon Fund projects 115 951 Add
p362403-100-
2020-0 Library Book bike 951-36-51-3601-57990 Other Capital Outlay 7,000 X Budget for annual FY24 Carbon Fund projects 116 133 Add 133-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund 31,000 X
Budget Transfer out of Carbon Fund to fund Misc.

Projects 117
133 Add 133-00-00-0000-59161 To Parking Fund 5,000 X Budget Transfer out of Carbon Fund to p402002 118 133 Add 133-00-00-0000-59109 To Library JPA Fund 7,000 X Budget Transfer out of Carbon Fund to p402002 119 101 Add g502401 California Automated Permit
Processing (CalAPP) Program -
SolarAPP+
101-50-74-2301-43210 State operating grants and
contributions
60,000 X
Received State grant APP-22-220 for $60,000.

Agreement term is 03/06/2023 to 05/31/2027.
120
101 Add g502401
California Automated Permit
Processing (CalAPP) Program -
SolarAPP+ 101-50-74-2301-54990 Miscellaneous supplies and services 60,000 X Received State grant APP-22-220 for $60,000.

Agreement term is 03/06/2023 to 05/31/2027.
121
101 Add g502402-127-2100-
0 908 Ocean St. EIR 101-50-71-1302-43310 Local operating grants & contributions 261,358
X BA wasn't included with the agenda item when it
went to council on 12/12/23; revenue includes a 25%
administration fee 122
101 Add
g502402-100-2020-
0 908 Ocean St. EIR
101-50-71-1302-52199
Other professional & technical services
209,086
X BA wasn't included with the agenda item when it
went to council on 12/12/23 123
311 Add
c512201-435-5025-
0 Pacific Station North 311-51-80-9990-46342 Contributions - other agencies 225,000 X Additional funding from Metro for Interim Metro Plan
and Operations 124
311 Add
c512201-100-2020-
0 Pacific Station North 311-51-80-9990-57390 Other Infrastructure 225,000 X Additional funding from Metro for Interim Metro Plan
and Operations 125
311 Add
c401413-956-5019-
0 MB Sanctuary Scenic Trail
Segment 7 311-40-64-9330-43357 Measure D - SCCRTC 32,184 X Unanticipated revenue from RTC for signs and
Lennox Crossings costs. 126
311 Add
c401413-100-2020-
0 MB Sanctuary Scenic Trail
Segment 7 311-40-64-9330-57307 Pedestrian/bike systems 32,184 X Unanticipated costs (and revenue from RTC) for signs
and Lennox Crossings. 127
731 Add
g402403-1026-
1018-0
CalRecycle SB 1383 Local Asst
Grant OWR2 731-40-63-7305-43210
State operating grants and
contributions 123,030 X
New CalRecycle grant for SB1383 Food Scrap
Collection Program Implementation 128
Expenditures with off setting Revenue - Net Zero corrections

Page 7 of 9 ends

19.1.15 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
731 Add
g402403-100-2020-
0 CalRecycle SB 1383 Local Asst
Grant OWR2 731-40-63-7305-52151 Program services 123,030 X New CalRecycle grant for SB1383 Food Scrap
Collection Program Implementation 129
811 Add 811-40-61-7834-44853 Equipment - fuel island charges 300,000 X Increasing anticipated revenue to match additional
expense needed for fuel and oil. Fund 811 receives
cost recovery based on usage by City departments. 130
811 Add 811-40-61-7831-44851 Equipment - operations charges 210,000 X Increasing anticipated revenue to match additional
expense needed for work order related services. Fund
811 receives cost recovery based on usage by City
departments. 131
811 Add 811-40-61-7831-52199 Other professional & technical services 10,000 X Additional funds needed for Fleet Maintenance
costs. Expenses made in this Fleet Fund account are
recovered based off of actual usage from requested
departments/activities. 132
811 Add 811-40-61-7831-52241 Vehicle maintenance costs - outside 25,000 X Additional funds needed for Fleet Maintenance
costs. Expenses made in this Fleet Fund account are
recovered based off of actual usage from requested
departments/activities. 133
811 Add 811-40-61-7831-52242 Repair services - outside 175,000 X Additional funds needed for Fleet Maintenance
costs. Expenses made in this Fleet Fund account are
recovered based off of actual usage from requested
departments/activities. 134
811 Add 811-40-61-7831-53320 Gas and oil 300,000 X
Additional funds needed for Fleet Maintenance
costs. Expenses made in this Fleet Fund account are
recovered based off of actual usage from requested
departments/activities. 135
104 Add TBD Wharf Donations 104-30-43-3211-46302 Donations - parks and recreation 5,000 X The success of the TNL concert series, Halloween
and Winter on the Wharf events is generating
donations to support Wharf-related events. This
project will receive and track all Wharf-related
donation expenditures 136
104 Add TBD Wharf Donations 104-30-43-3211-52199
Other professional and technical
services 5,000 X
The success of the TNL concert series, Halloween
and Winter on the Wharf events is generating
donations to support Wharf-related events. This
project will receive and track all Wharf-related
donation expenditures 137
249 Add 249-00-00-0000-49191 Intra-entity fund transfer in 34,719 X to reimburse funds that was spent accidentally in
242 and was meant to fund a project in 249 138
242 Add 242-00-00-0000-59191 Intra-entity fund transfer out 34,719 X to reimburse funds that was spent accidentally in
242 and was meant to fund a project in 249 139
101 Add p102302-991-0-0
Encampment Response and
cleanup 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 240,000 X Need to add for two cleanups at 120K each 140 101 Add
p102302-100-
2020-0
Encampment Response and
cleanup 101-10-16-6105-57990 Other Capital Outlay 240,000 X Need to add for two cleanups at 120K each 141 293 Add 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 240,000 X Increase transfer-out to General Fund 142 101 Add p102210-991-0-0 Safe Parking Program - Tier 2 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 90,000 X Need additional funds for Safe Parking Tier 2 143 101 Add
p102210-100-
2020-0 Safe Parking Program - Tier 2 101-10-16-6105-57990 Other Capital Outlay 90,000 X Need additional funds for Safe Parking Tier 2 144 293 Add 293-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from CA14 90,000 X Increase transfer-out to General Fund 145 Expenditures with off setting Revenue - Net Zero corrections

Page 8 of 9 ends

19.1.16 Fund
Add/
Reduce
/New Project # Project Name GL Account String Account Description Amount OnetimeOn
Going Justification
101 Add p102306-992-0-0 Administrative & Management 101-00-00-0000-49177 From American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) 86,550 X
Funding source to match transfer out for PO
rollforward 146
101 Add
p102306-100-
2020-0 Administrative & Management 101-10-16-6105-52199 Other professional & technical services 86,550 X Budgeted expenditures for a PO rollforward 147 292 Add Administrative & Management 292-00-00-0000-59101 To General Fund from ARPA 86,550 X Transfer-out to match Transfer-in - for PO rollforward 148 101 Add c102304-991-0-0 Benchlands Restoration 101-00-00-0000-49178 From CA14 Homelessness Action Plan 6,750 X Funding source to match transfer out for PO
rollforward 149
311 Add
c102304-100-2020-
0 Benchlands Restoration 311-10-16-9980-57106 Land Improvements 6,750 X Budgeted expenditures for a PO rollforward 150 293 Add Benchlands Restoration 293-00-00-0000-59103 To General CIP Fund from CA14 6,750 X Transfer-out to match Transfer-in - for PO rollforward 151 311 Add c512002-943-0-0
Downtown Affordable Housing
Library 311-00-00-0000-49191 Intra-entity transfer in 120,000 X Additional Measure S funding for Calendar 2024
encumbrance 152
311 Add c512002-946-0-0
Downtown Affordable Housing
Library 311-00-00-0000-49158 From Econ Dev Trust Fund 1,777,784 X Purchase of property for the Downtown Affordable
Housing Library Project 153
136 Add
Downtown Affordable Housing
Library 136-00-00-0000-59103 To CIP Fund 1,777,784 X
Purchase of property for the Downtown Afford'ble
Hsing Library Project 154
311 Add
c512002 100 2020
0 Downtown Affordable Housing
Library 311-51-80-9990-57390 Other Infrastructure 120,000 X Additional Measure S funding for Calendar 2024
encumbrance 155
311 Add
c512002 100 2020
0 Downtown Affordable Housing
Library 311-51-80-9990-57390 Other Infrastructure 2,600,000 X Purchase of property for the Downtown Afford'ble
Hsing Library Project 156
REVENUE TOTAL 3,770,375
EXPENDITURE TOTAL 6,784,403
GF REVENUE TOTAL 411,228
GF EXPENDITURE TOTAL 352,206
GRAND TOTAL REVENUE (10,782,600)
GRAND TOTAL EXPENDITURE 14,274,517
GRAND TOTAL GF REVENUE 358,844
GRAND TOTAL GF EXPENDITURE 721,206
Expenditures with off setting Revenue - Net Zero corrections

Page 9 of 9 ends

19.1.17 M E M O R A N D U M
December 5, 2023
To: Matt Huffaker, City Manager
From: Tiffany Wise-West, Sustainability and Resilience Officer Subject: Recommendation to Approve FY24 Proposed Carbon Fund projects In 2014, the Climate Action Program initiated conversation on developing an internal Carbon Fund for the purpose of enhancing the City’s ability to invest in carbon reducing projects that align with the City’s Climate Action Plan. Since that time, the fund has been established with the Finance Department and energy rebate check deposits have been transferred to the Carbon Fund account, with any end year balance set to roll over year to year. In March, 2016 the Administrative Procedural Order (APO) establishing the Carbon Fund was finalized. Since its first grant round in 2016, the Carbon Fund has awarded over $300,000 to 31 projects, funding fleet ebikes, streetlight assessments, expansion of electronic plan review systems, an urban tree inventory CalFire grant match, Harvey West pool pump controls, microgrants for Green Business certification, employee alternative commute incentives, and much more.

Between September and November, 2023, pursuant to the APO, the employee Sustainability Team conducted a multi-meeting project proposal and prioritization process to utilize a portion of the fund balance, reserving the remainder for future use. Pursuant to the APO, the Sustainability and Climate Action Manager will recommend projects to the City Manager for approval. I am providing the recommended project list and request approval indicated by your signature so that we have a record of the approved project list.

Purchase of 2 E-bikes $8,000 Catherine Brothers (PD)
E-Bike incentives for employees $5,000 Claire Gallogly (PW) Change Management Consultant $12,000 Tiffany Wise-West (CMO) Electric conversion of gas landscaping equipment $11,000 Aaron Vera (FD) Libraries Bookbike $7,000 Jesse Silva (Library)
Total $43,000
DocuSign Envelope ID: 43C8D21D-93D0-41E1-8F71-115CF08A999C

19.1.18 Once approved, I will notify proposers and work with those departments’ principal management analysts and Finance Department staff to prepare mid-year budget adjustments to be adoptedin early 2024. Please contact me if you should have any questions or concerns regarding this recommended project list. If you agree with this recommendation and approve of City staff completing these projects with the Carbon Fund amounts noted, please indicate by signature below.

Approval Signature:

I approve the recommendation from the Sustainability and Resilience Officer to fund the proposed projects through the Carbon Fund and proceed with implementation. ________________________________________ ____________
Matt Huffaker, City Manager date
Cc: Laura Schmidt, Assistant City Manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: 43C8D21D-93D0-41E1-8F71-115CF08A999C 12/6/2023

19.1.19 Attachment 1
Pay Scale Grade/Class
No.

Classification Title Unit Analyzed Increase
GS-5 132 COURIER/DRIVER
Service 2.0%
GS-5 282 LIBRARY ASSISTANT I
Service 2.0%
GS-5 289 VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR ASSIST
Service 2.0%
GS-6 212 WATER METER TECHNICIAN
Service 2.4%
GS-6 139 EQUIPMENT SERVICE WORKER
Service 2.4%
GS-7 111 WW PLANT OPERATOR IN TRAINING
Service 2.4%
GS-7 225 WASTE REDUCTION ASSITANT
Service 2.0%
GS-7 285 LIBRARY INFORMATION SPECIALIST
Service 2.0%
GS-7 137 EQUIPMENT MECHANIC I
Service 2.0%
GS-7 264 SENIOR PARKING SERVICES WORKER
Service 2.0%
GS-7 153 LIGHT EQUIPMENT MECHANIC
Service 2.0%
GS-8 271 UTILITY ACCOUNT SPECIALIST
Service 2.0%
GS-8 182 RESOURCE RECOVERY EQUIP OPERAT
Service 2.0%
GS-8 288 PLANNING & COMM DEVEL TECH
Service 2.0%
GS-8 364 LIBRARY ASSISTANT IV Supervisor 2.0%
GS-8 216 WHARF CONSTRUCTION WORKER
Service 2.0%
GS-8 740 LIBRARY SPECIALIST
Management 2.0%
GS-8 742 LIBRARIAN I
Management 2.0%
GS-9 279 REVENUE COLLECTIONS SPECIALIST
Service 12.4%
GS-9 287 SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR
Service 12.4%
GS-9 141 ENVIRON PROGRAMS ANALYST I
Service 12.4%
GS-9 198 TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR
Service 12.4%
GS-9 237 GREEN BLDG ENVIRO SPECIALIST
Service 12.4%
GS-9 341 WHARF CONSTRUCTION CREW LDR
Supervisor 12.4%
GS-10 320 PARKING OFFICE SUPERVISOR Supervisor 1.1%
GS-10 280 FAC MAINT/ENERGY PROJ COORD
Service 1.1%
GS-10 136 ENVIRON PROGRAMS ANALYST II
Service 1.1%
GS-10 120 CHEMIST I
Service 1.1%

19.1.20 Attachment 1
GS-11 232 INFORMATION TECH SPECIALIST III
Service 2.0%
GS-11 782 ECONOMIC DEVEL CORD I Management 2.0%
GS-11 777 ASSOCIATE PLANNER I
Management 2.0%
GS-11 783 ECONOMIC DEVEL CORD II Management 2.0%
GS-13 601 DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL
Fire 2.5%
GS-13 786 CITY CLERK ADMINISTRATOR Management 2.5%
GS-13 723 TRANSPORTATION PLANNER II Management 2.5%
GS-13 727 PARKING PROGRAM MANAGER
Management 2.5%
GS-13 712 CUSTOMER SERVICE MGR Management 2.5%
GS-13 764 DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL
Management 2.5%
GS-13 779 WATERSHED COMPLIANCE MANAGER Management 2.5%
GS-13 708 SENIOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
Management 2.5%
GS-13 738 SUSTAIN & RESILIENCY OFFICER Management 2.5%
LEO-5 292 SENIOR POLICE RECORDS TECH
Service 0.7%

19.1.21 FY 2024 Mid Year Update
February 13, 2024
Elizabeth Cabell, Finance Director
Tracy Cole, Budget Manager
Sara DeLeon, People Officer

19.1.22 Agenda
• Operating General Fund (FY 2022 - FY 2024)
• Revenue Trends (FY 2021 - FY 2024)
• FY 2024 Mid Year Budget and
Personnel Changes
• FY 2025 and Beyond
• 2021 Compensation Study, Phase III
• Recommended Action

19.1.23 Operating General Fund FY 2022 – FY 2024

19.1.24 FY 2024 – as of 12/31
• Strong start to FY 2024
• January storms, opened shelters
FY 2024 Adopted
Budget
Adjusted
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/23
Revenue $139.3M $142.2M $69.2M (49%)
Expenditures $139.9M $150.4M $74.3M (57%)

19.1.25 General Fund Tax Revenues

19.1.26 FY 2024 Budget Adjustment Highlights
Revenues
Water ($14.1M) Budget correction
Stormwater (885K) Project corrections
General Fund (130K) Moving tech surcharge into
separate fund
Expenditures
IT $3.8M Move money into project for the ERP
Parking 2.3M Purchase of building

19.1.27 FY 2024 Major Position Changes
New FTE Additions and Classification Plan
Update
Enterprise Funds Only
Department Additions
Public Works +1.0 Wastewater Facilities Lead
+0.5 Waste Reduction Assistant
+1.0 Assistant Engineer I/II
+0.5 Solid Waste Worker
Water Water Facilities Field Supervisor (Compaction Correction) +1.0 Associate Planner I/II

19.1.28 FY 2024 Major Position Changes
Classification Plan and Personnel Listing Modifications No Funding
Department Additions
Police New - Police Records Supervisor
New - Police Property and Evidence Supervisor
Parks and Recreation Administrative Changes for payroll/benefits efficiency. Combining existing .5FTE positions into

1.0FTE positions. No net change.

19.1.29 • Expenditures expected to continue
outpacing revenues (averaging $10.5M
deficit over the next 10 years excluding use of
reserves)
• Operating and Emergency Reserves
will be depleted by FY 2027
• Pension Reserve will be depleted by
FY 2028
• Explore budget options
• Council Ad Hoc Budget and Revenue
Committee
• Cost Recovery
• Sales Tax ballot measure
• Funding for CIP is a priority
FY 2025 and Beyond

19.1.30 General Fund Reserves
OPERATING RESERVE –
5% of adopted budget
PENSION RESERVE –
R t i t d l b d

5.30 6.20

7.10 7.10

7.50 8.50

17.60 20.60
-

5.00 10.00

15.00 20.00

25.00 FY 2022 Reserves 2022 Pension Reserve FY 2023 2023 Pension Reserve Chart Title
Operating Emergency Pension GOAL

19.1.31 FY25 Budget Calendar
Milestone Date
Operating and CIP Budget Prep February – May
Budget reviewed by Commissions April – May
Proposed Operating & CIP Budgets
posted to website
May 17
Budget Hearings May 28 – 29
Budget Adoption June 11

19.1.32 Phase III Analysis
2021 Compensation Study

19.1.33 Phase III: Overview

1. Our Efforts

2. The Analysis

3. Recommendation

19.1.34 Our Efforts
Thriving Organization
Thriving Organization
Advance a high-performing organization where
employees are empowered to deliver outstanding
services to the community.

Health In All Policies (HiAP)
Economic Security and Mobility – stable employment,
livable wages, food security, ability to afford basic
needs, wealth accumulation, and prosperity.
2024 Compensation Study
Preparation – Consensus - Analysis
All-In Shaping Our Future
More than Money: Culture as a Competitive Advantage
Money Still Matters: 2024 Compensation Study

19.1.35 The Analysis
Classifications Analyzed

1. Benchmarked and below
market 10% or more

2. Mapped to a Benchmark

3. Unmapped and Related

19.1.36 Benchmarked
Classifications Analyzed
Benchmarked Classification Percent %
Below Market
Building Inspector -11.1
Buyer I/II -22.4
Chief Ranger -12.0
Development Manager -20.4
Finance Manager -12.5
Human Resources Analyst I/II -10.3
Police Records Technician -10.7
Ranger I/II -12.0
Senior Ranger -12.0
Utility Service Representative I/II -12.4
Water Distribution Operator
Trainee/II/III
-13.9

19.1.37 Mapped
Classifications Analyzed
Benchmarked Class Mapped Class Percent %
Below
Market
Development
Manager
Economic Development
Manager
-20.4
Finance Manager Purchasing and Risk Manager -12.5
Ranger I/II Ranger Assistant -12.0
Utility Service
Representative I/II
Utility Service Field Technician
I/II
-12.4
Water Distribution
Operator Trainee/II/III
Wastewater Collection
Maintenance Technician I/II
-13.9

19.1.38 Unmapped
Classifications Analyzed
Attachment 1
42 Total Number of Unmapped Classifications
Classifications by Type
Administrative
24%
Construction/Trades
10%
Economic Development
5%
Green
Building
5%
Information Technology
2%
Library
14%
Mechanic
7%
Parking
7%
Planning
2%
Public Safety
2%
Resource Recovery
5%
Science,
Engineering
10%
Transportation Planning
5%
Utility
2%

19.1.39 Estimated Annual Cost
Benchmarked – Mapped - Unmapped
FY 2024
3% COLA
FY 2025
4% COLA
Total
$ 760K $ 863.5K $ 1.55M
Note: Cost does not include special pays and other differentials, etc.

Recommendation: Human Resources to submit a decision
package as part of FY 2025 budget process; approval
dependent on the City’s fiscal status and Council approval.

19.1.40 Recommended Action:
1) Adopt a resolution amending FY 2024 budget appropriation of expenditures to all funds as listed in Exhibit A, in the amount of $14,274,517 including an increase of $721,206 to the General Fund, and a total appropriation decrease of revenues as listed in Exhibit A in the amount of $10,782,600 to all funds, including a net addition of $358,844 to the General Fund; and
2) Authorize the City Manager to allocate budgetary changes within the applicable funds and departments.
3) Adopt resolution amending the Classification and Compensation Plans and the midyear FY2024 Budget Personnel Complement by approving classification and position changes in specified departments.

19.1.41 Thank you

19.1.42 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/25/2024
AGENDA OF: 02/13/2024
DEPARTMENT: Human Resources
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending the City of Santa Cruz Personnel Complement and Classification and Compensation Plans for the Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Police, and Water Departments (HR)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution amending the Classification and Compensation Plans and the midyear FY 2024 Budget Personnel Complement by approving classification and position changes in specified departments.

BACKGROUND: There are staffing and position actions recommended by City departments to be approved by the City Council to the FY 2024 budget and which are expected to improve operational functions and/or are administratively clean up items.

DISCUSSION: Departments have determined, through careful analysis and with the assistance of the Human Resources Department, that the position and classification recommendations listed below will improve their operations, in concert with actions taken in the FY 2024 midyear budget changes. The departments are either adding or deleting positions, adding new classifications, or making a corrected salary change.

Staffing Revisions – Personnel, with Budget Adjustment:

1. PUBLIC WORKS
Wastewater Facilities Mechanical Technician I/II 1.0 FTE Position Deletion This position change deletes a vacant and budgeted 1.0 FTE Wastewater Facilities Mechanical Technician I/II position in exchange for adding a 1.0 FTE Wastewater Facilities Lead Mechanical Technician position (see below).

The scope and complexity of industrial mechanical maintenance and asset management at the Wastewater Treatment Facility results in several crews working on complex maintenance projects simultaneously. The additional Lead position improves the ratio of Leads to Technicians and will provide a higher level of subject matter expertise at the advanced journey level needed for technical direction and training to the large number of maintenance staff and ongoing projects. The addition of a new 1.0 FTE Lead position will improve succession planning efforts and reduce the technical field burden on the Wastewater Mechanical Supervisor.

Wastewater Facilities Lead Mechanical Technician 1.0 FTE Position Add

19.2.1 See above – this is the add associated with the above position deletion.

Waste Reduction Assistant .5 FTE Position Add
The position of Waste Reduction Assistant .50 FTE position will provide the additional services required under the new CA State law SB 1383. California SB 1383 is a bill that sets goals to reduce disposal of organic waste in landfills, including edible food and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This position add will provide customer waste audits, add service capability, and assist with contamination compliance reports to the State CalRecycle agency. This position will also assist with food recovery programs targeting our local stores and restaurants. It will ensure they distribute recoverable food to local food recovery organizations and maintain records for review upon request.

Assistant Engineer I/II 1.0 FTE Position Add
The Public Works General Engineering division deleted an Assistant Engineer I/II position after the 2020 budget reduction cycle. Engineering has been increasingly burdened with high demands with permits, developmental reviews, development ROW inspections, and scheduled and emergency capital investment program (CIP) projects without the help of this additional Assistant Engineer. The Engineering division has been integral in developmental review and endless inspections related to the growing Downtown District development projects and the Soquel Creek Pure Water Soquel project. On average, this division issues annually approximately 1,200 permits, manages almost 2,000 inspections, and more than a dozen subdivision requests. The State is continuing to pass new State housing laws every year since 2021. With these new laws, Public Works’s permitting, inspections, subdivisions and development review continue to dramatically trend upwards. These new laws will also impact all PW Engineering including Traffic, Wastewater Collections, Stormwater and Street Maintenance.

By reducing positions, Public Works Engineering has had to seek outside engineering services work through contractors in order to keep up with the high volume of development review requests. Approximate costs for those outside services is estimated at $70,000 annually. This is expected to increase due to State law reformations, noted previously.

Solid Waste Worker .50 FTE to 1.00 FTE Increase
Increasing this currently vacant position to full-time increases operational capacity, enhances service delivery, and supports current and new initiatives related to food waste collection and addressing illegal dumping.

The Solid Waste Worker classification experiences approximately 11 vacancies on average each year (over the last three years), which accounts to 26% of the Solid Waste Worker workforce.

Increasing this position to full-time would aid in the employee support needed to collect 60-75 tons of residential trash per day, not including commercial refuse. This will allow the department to add another driver to operate the sweeper and this will also ease the workload of the additional service added this year citywide, food waste and assist with illegal dumping.

2. WATER
Water Facilities Field Supervisor Compensation Change
This salary increase of 5% to the classification of Water Facilities Field Supervisor is a salary compaction correction retroactive to September 16, 2023 as part of the 2021 Compensation

19.2.2 Study Implementation and should have been included in the Human Resources Agenda Report and Resolution No. NS-30,196 which was approved by City Council on September 12, 2023.

This resolution modified the Compensation Plan for identified Supervisory classifications to address compaction and market.

Associate Planner I/II 1.0 Position Add
This new position would work with two associate planners under the principal planner to support capital program environmental compliance and utility planning efforts.

The Water Department's ambitious capital program includes projects that touch all aspects of the water system. The Department has numerous complex projects to accomplish in the years to come, requiring compliance across all phases of projects including environmental review and permitting, mitigation monitoring, permit implementation oversight. This work requires thorough knowledge of our water system and nuanced understanding of the regulatory landscape. The Department currently outsources a portion of construction-related environmental compliance efforts as existing staff cannot support all current work, and this position would increase the ability to effectively perform this work in-house.

In support of utility planning functions, additional staff resources are required for increased regulatory compliance and reporting requirements from the State. Specifically, California Water Boards' new regulatory framework, "Making Conservation a California Way of Life" based on Assembly Bill 1668 and Senate Bill 606 requires new compliance reporting each year beginning in 2024. The framework holds water suppliers to an annual "urban water use objective" which must be calculated, monitored, and reported on annually. The framework will also require programs to address large landscapes that are otherwise not included in the quantified water use objective. Additional effort is required to ensure ongoing consistency and accuracy in regulatory reporting across multiple State platforms with overlapping interests.

Staffing Revision – No Budget Changes:

3. PARKS AND RECREATION
Combine two (2) part-time .50 FTE positions into one (1) full-time 1.0 F full-time position Administrative Assistant I/II
Currently an employee holds two separate part-time positions in the same classification. This would combine the part-time positions into one full-time position for improved administration and employee benefits processing.

Combine two (2) part-time .50 FTE positions into one (1) full-time 1.0 F full-time position Facility Attendant
Currently an employee holds two separate part-time positions in the same classification. This would combine the part-time positions into one full-time position for improved administration and employee benefits processing.

Classification Revision Only – No Personnel or Budget Authorized:

19.2.3 4. POLICE
Police Records Supervisor – New Classification
The addition of a supervisor classification in the Police Records section would allow for better supervision and monitoring and organizing workflow, identifying inefficiencies and pathways for improving productivity, compliance and revenue streams. The classification would assist with overseeing staffing performance, providing guidance and support, identifying development needs, and managing the reciprocal relationship between staff and the Department. Additionally, the position would assist with setting goals and targets to develop plans to grow with ever changing Federal, State and City laws and regulations and the Department's mission and values.

The classification would assist with a more robust career ladder for recruitment and retention.

Police Property and Evidence Supervisor – New Classification The addition of a supervisor position in the Property & Evidence section would greatly assist with the level of the work and importance of handling sensitive police property and evidence that is conducted in that section. Currently there are Police and Property Specialists but no Supervisor within the section itself. This would assist with alleviating some of the supervision which currently rests with a Police Sergeant and whose time can be better spent working with the police officers.

FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact is as follows:

Enterprise Funds General Fund
New Positions $296,629 $0
Compaction and Mapping
Updates
$11,172 $0
Prepared By:

Cathy Bonino
Principal HR Analyst
Submitted By:

Sara De Leon
Human Resources Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

19.2.4 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING

THE PERSONNEL COMPLEMENT AND CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLANS AND THE MID FY2024 BUDGET – PUBLIC WORKS, PARKS AND

RECREATION, POLICE, AND WATER DEPARTMENTS
WHEREAS, staff has recommended certain modifications to the Classification and Compensation Plans.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz, as follows:

That effective Feb 17, 2024 the City of Santa Cruz Classification and Compensation Plans be modified to:

Activity Classification No. and Title Salary (New
Classifications and
Changes)

PUBLIC WORKS
Delete Position
248-004
7203 248- WW Facilities
Mechanical Technician I/II
(1.0 FTE)
Add Position
249-xxx
7203 249- WW Facilities Lead
Mechanical Technician
(1.0 FTE)
Add Position
225-xxx
7306 225- Waste Reduction
Assistant (.50 FTE)
Add Position
109-xxx
4102 109- Assistant Engineer I/II
(1.0 FTE)
Change Position FTE
191-042
7302 191- Solid Waste Worker
Change From: .50 FTE
Change To: 1.00 FTE

PARKS AND

RECREATION

19.2.5 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
2 Activity Classification No. and Title Salary (New
Classifications and
Changes)
Combine Positions 3201 106 – Administrative
Assistant I/II
From: 106-017 and 106-
014
1214,3212 Two (2) .50 FTE
To:106-014 3212 One (1) 1.00 FTE
Combine Positions 3213 140 – Facility Attendant
From 140-004 and 140-
016
Two (2) .50 FTE
To: 140-004 3213 One (1) 1.00 FTE
POLICE
Add New Classification
322
Police Records Supervisor
(1.0 FTE)
$6,150/mo - $8,654/mo
Add New Classification
373
Police Property and Evidence
Supervisor (1.0 FTE)
$6,521/mo - $9,174/mo
WATER
Add Position:
777/778
7102 777/778 Associate Planner
(1.0 FTE)
That effective retroactive to September 16, 2023 the City of Santa Cruz Classification and Compensation Plans be modified to:

WATER
Salary Change xxx 340 – Water Facilities Field
Supervisor
From: $8,353/mo - $11,755/mo
To: $9,120/mo - $12,343/mo

19.2.6 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of February 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

19.2.7 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/25/2024
AGENDA OF: 02/13/2024
DEPARTMENT: Economic Development and Housing
SUBJECT: First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Uncodified Ordinance No. 2022- 16 Extending Temporary Use of Certain Adjacent Public Street and Outdoor Areas for Eligible Businesses (ED)
RECOMMENDATION: Introduce for publication an ordinance amending uncodified Ordinance No. 2022-16 extending temporary use of certain adjacent public street and outdoor areas for eligible businesses that extends the temporary period for commercial use on private property from March 31, 2024 to May 31, 2025.

BACKGROUND: In light of the devastating impacts that the pandemic has had on the local economy and for locally owned businesses in particular, the City Manager, acting in his capacity as the Emergency Services Director, issued two related Executive Orders to establish the Temporary Outdoor Expansion Program (temporary program) to address the ability for businesses to expand commercial activity in the public right of way and other outdoor spaces (Executive Order 2020-11 executed on June 4, 2020 and Executive Order 2020-15, issued on July 30, 2020). On December 8, 2020, the City Council adopted Emergency Ordinance 2020-27, incorporating the earlier Executive Orders allowing for the outdoor expansion of commercial activity in the public right of way and other outdoor spaces and extending the timeframe to October 31, 2021.

On June 3, 2021, Governor Newsom sent a letter urging local jurisdictions to consider extending existing programs and zoning that allow outdoor expansion areas among other options until December 31, 2021. In response to the Governor’s letter and the ongoing impacts to business from COVID restrictions these conditions, on June 22, 2021, the City Council adopted Emergency Ordinance No. 2021-14, which extended Ordinance No. 2020-27, allowing for the temporary use of certain areas of the public right of way and private property for commercial activity until December 31, 2021.

Cognizant of the prolonged negative impacts to local businesses the City Council on November 9, 2021 adopted an uncodified Ordinance No. 2021-21, further extending the temporary program through December 31, 2022.

At the October 25, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council approved an extension of the temporary permits for private property through March 31, 2024 and directed staff to work with the Outdoor Dining City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee (Subcommittee) to develop ordinance changes and improvements to the permit process needed to streamline the permanent approval of

20.1 the private property outdoor dining including working with Coastal Commission for approval of permits in the coastal zone.

DISCUSSION: Following the City Council direction in late 2022, the Subcommittee on outdoor dining began meeting on policy related to private property outdoor dining in May 2023.

The Subcommittee includes Councilmembers Brunner, Kalantari-Johnson, and Newsome and is supported by planning and economic development staff to explore policy development and streamlining of a permanent private outdoor dining (PPOD) permit process.

The initial work of the Subcommittee began with meetings with city staff to learn more about current private property outdoor seating ordinances and permitting processes, potential parking and noise impacts, and beginning work to draft the framework of potential ordinance modifications to support the goals of streamlining the process. The Subcommittee has also met with the Police Department to learn about the impacts temporary outdoor dining on private property has had on public safety and calls for service to these establishments as a result of these expanded outdoor areas.

Community Engagement: Due to the impacts of this policy on both residential areas near outdoor areas and participating businesses, staff developed a thorough outreach program for both the public and permit holders. Following three internal subcommittee meetings between staff and City Council, the engagement process began in September 2023. The first meeting included the Subcommittee and staff meeting with a small group of three businesses whose early conversations with City Council were part of the formation of this Subcommittee. This second meeting was open to the general community and residents who live near temporary outdoor seating areas to share input on the proposed ordinance. The third and final meeting of the initial outreach process was a meeting with all active permit holders to collect feedback from the business community.

The community meeting was held the evening of Monday, September 11 and had 23 total attendees including three temporary permit holding businesses. Over the course of the meeting attendees were given a presentation by staff about the proposed new permitting process after which they were invited to complete a community survey. Additionally, the Subcommittee gave attendees the opportunity to speak to their specific thoughts on the project and any ideas they had about specific conditions of use they saw as effective to the success of and to reduce any potential impacts of making this a permanent project. Impacted residents were made aware of the community meeting through noticing to those within a 200 ft distance of any of the following temporary permit holders: Brady’s Yacht Club, La Posta, and Bantam. These establishments were selected due to their immediate proximity to residential zoning and feedback received by staff from residents around some of these businesses in response to previous extensions of the temporary permits. The community at large was also notified of the meeting through social media posts via Instagram and Facebook as well as staff contacting those who had expressed concerns about the impacts of temporary permits.

The community survey referenced above was available from Monday, September 11 through Friday, September 22 and received 508 responses. This high number of responses was likely the result of temporary permit holders distributing the survey to customers as well as word of mouth distribution by neighbors. The highest number of respondents received was from the Seabright/Midtown/East Side area with 197 responses, or 39% of total surveys completed. The majority of respondents were in support of outdoor dining in general, expressing support for a

20.2 continuation of all outdoor programs and urging that any process developed by the City be affordable and streamlined for businesses to continue operating. More than 60% of respondents noted that they had “no concerns” about outdoor dining on private property.

The City also received responses with concerns, primarily from those in close proximity to a temporary outdoor seating area. These concerns were mainly focused on the impacts of noise, live entertainment, hours of operation, the loss of neighborhood parking due to patios occupying portions of previously designated parking lots and impacts of delivery vehicles blocking neighborhood streets. Hours of operation and noise were the overall highest-level concerns, in addition to design and aesthetics. Trash and safety/disorderly conduct were ranked lowest.

The business engagement meeting for temporary permit holders was held on Wednesday, September 13 and had 12 total attendees. The 21 permit holders were notified of the meeting via email. Over the course of the meeting business owners were given an in-depth presentation by staff about the proposed permitting process and were invited to participate in an open forum about the potential conditions of approval. Though many businesses expressed concern about the need for permits, all expressed they planned to proceed with making their outdoor seating areas permanent. Following the discussion, attendees were invited to complete a survey on the presentation to provide more feedback on the proposed changes to the permit process and code requirements. All permit holders were sent the presentation and survey to complete following the meeting. The permit holder survey received 12 responses, permit and construction costs were ranked as the highest concern, followed by building code required upgrades while noise control and entertainment permits were listed as lowest priority. Of the responders, 8 said they planned to proceed with the permitting process to apply for permanent outdoor seating, one said no, and two did not respond.

Following feedback from businesses and community members, the Subcommittee and staff have been working on revisions to the proposed permitting process to further streamline and reduce the costs and timeline required for transitioning to permanent approval. Staff is working to finalize revisions to the proposed process in preparation for a second business engagement meeting to be held in February to collect additional feedback before bringing the proposals to Planning Commission on March 7 and to City Council by April 9.

Coastal Commission: City staff consulted with Coastal Commission staff to discuss the previous 2022-23 extension of the temporary permits in the Coastal Zone. Coastal Commission staff did not object to the extension of these temporary permits. Staff met with Coastal Commission again in 2023 to discuss the adoption of a permanent private property outdoor dining program and Coastal Commission staff again did not object to the extension of temporary permits nor the proposals for the permanent program.

Health In All Policies: In 2019, the City adopted a Health in All Policies strategy in order to eliminate inequities in health and well-being and attain equity for all residents. The proposed revisions to the extension of Temporary Outdoor Extension Program to allow business to have a full year to bring their temporary outdoor dining spaces up to the requirements of the permanent ordinance supports the City’s Health in All Policies strategy as the intent of the revisions is to provide people with a space where they can dine at local restaurants with a reduced risk on contracting COVID-19. Additionally, this proposal supports health in all policies by allowing businesses to place their outdoor extension areas into private parking lots which can help to

20.3 promote active transit and public transit use through a reduction in easy access to automobile parking.

Based on the estimated timeline for review and approval of the proposed permanent program ordinance changes and permit process revisions, staff recommends extending the temporary permits for private property until May 31, 2025. This extension will provide businesses with approximately one year from the program’s anticipated adoption to continue to operate under temporary permits while they obtain their permanent approvals and complete any necessary modifications to their outdoor seating areas to meet the requirements of the permanent program.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Josephine Buchanan
Economic Development
Coordinator
Rebecca Unitt
Economic Development
Manager
Submitted By:

Bonnie Lipscomb
Economic Development and
Housing Director
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. ORDINANCE.DOCX

20.4 ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX

AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ EXTENDING UNCODIFIED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 2022-16 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY

USE OF CERTAIN ADJACENT PUBLIC STREET AND OUTDOOR AREAS FOR

ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES IMPACTED BY INDOOR BUSINESS CLOSURES RELATED TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC UNTIL MAY 31, 2025 ON PRIVATE PROPERTY BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz as follows:

WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for a broader spread of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the Santa Cruz City Council adopted Resolution No. NS29,640 Declaring a Local Health Emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, in light of the devastating impacts that the pandemic has had on the local economy and for locally owned businesses in particular, the Director of Emergency Services issued two related Executive Orders to address the ability for businesses to temporarily use certain areas of the public right-of-way and private property for commercial activity, namely Executive Order No. 2020-11, issued on June 4, 2020 (ratified by City Council Resolution No. NS-29,667 on June 23, 2020) and Executive Order No. 2020-15, issued on July 30, 2020 (ratified by City Council Resolution No. NS-29,695 on August 11, 2020); and WHEREAS, on December 8, 2020, the City Council adopted an uncodified Emergency Ordinance No. 2020-27, incorporating Executive Order Nos. 2020-11 and 2020-15, allowing for the continued temporary use of certain public right-of-way and private areas until October 31, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2021, the City Council adopted an uncodified Emergency Ordinance No. 2021-14, which extended uncodified Ordinance No. 2020-27, allowing for the temporary use of certain areas of the public right of way and private property for commercial activity until December 31, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, cognizant of the prolonged negative impacts of the pandemic to local businesses, the City Council adopted an uncodified Ordinance No. 2021-21, further extending uncodified Ordinance No. 2020-27, allowing for the temporary use of certain areas in the public right-of-way and private property until December 31, 2022; and WHEREAS on October 25, 2022, the City Council adopted an uncodified Ordinance 2022- 16, which extended uncodified Ordinance No. 2020-27 to allow for the temporary use of certain

20.5 public street and outdoor areas for commercial activity (1) until October 31, 2023 in the public right-of-way; (2) until March 31, 2024 on private property; and (3) extending the Cathcart Street temporary partial street closure until March 31, 2023; and WHEREAS, at the October 25, 2022 meeting, the City Council also directed City staff to work with the Outdoor Dining City Council ad-hoc Subcommittee to draft ordinance amendments and procedures to streamline the permanent private outdoor dining permit process, and work with Coastal Commission for approval of permits for private properties within the coastal zone; and WHEREAS, City staff is finalizing ordinance amendments and procedures for the permanent private outdoor dining program, and estimates businesses will need approximately one year following the anticipated adoption of the program in Spring 2024 to continue operating under the temporary permits while the businesses apply for permits under the permanent private outdoor dining program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that extending the duration of uncodified Ordinance No. 2020-27 until May 31, 2025 for temporary use of private property for commercial activity will facilitate business recovery, generate increased sales tax revenue for the City, provide City staff the time necessary to finalize ordinance amendments and procedures for the permanent private outdoor dining program, and provide business owners sufficient time to apply for and obtain permits for the permanent private outdoor dining program.

Section 1. Section 5 of uncodified Ordinance No. 2020-27, adopted as an emergency measure by the City Council on December 8, 2020, and amended by uncodified Ordinances No. 2021-14 on June 22, 2021,No. 2021-21 on November 9, 2021, and No. 2022-16 on October 25, 2022, is hereby further amended to include the following expiration date:

Temporary Use Located on Private Property: shall expire on May 31, 2025.

Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance. This ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15301 (existing facilities), 15303 (construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures) and 15304(e) (minor temporary use of land having negligible or no permanent effects on the environment).

Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days following its final adoption (the “Effective Date”) and shall expire on the dates set forth above, unless further extended by action of the City Council.

20.6 PASSED FOR PUBLICATION this 13th day of February, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
PASSED FOR FINAL ADOPTION this XX day of XX, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
This is to certify that the above and
foregoing document is the original
of Ordinance No. 2024-xx and that
it has been published or posted in
accordance with the Charter of the
City of Santa Cruz.
________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

20.7 From: Brooke Kirby
To: City Council
Subject: Temporary Patio Deadline Extension
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 3:00:32 PM
My partner and I want to thank you for considering an extension on the temporary patio deadline. We live in Santa Cruz because we love being outdoors and actively seek out places that offer outdoor dining/seating options. We are in full support of extending the outdoor patio deadline and working towards a path to permanence.

Thank you city council for all your hard work!
Best,
Brooke

20.8 CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 1/4/2024
AGENDA OF:

DEPARTMENT:
2/13/2024
Planning & Community Development
SUBJECT: Review of Recent State of California Legislation Impacting Local Control and 2023 Land Use and Housing Legislation Update (PL)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the review of recent state of California legislation impacting local control and 2023 land use and housing legislation update.

BACKGROUND: One of the recommendations in the Housing Blueprint Subcommittee report accepted in 2018 was to provide updates to the City Council regarding housing-related State legislation. Staff has provided regular updates since, and this report serves as a summary of key pieces of legislation from 2023 that impact the City’s land use and housing decisions..

State legislation continuously builds on other recent legislative updates. Therefore, in addition to a summary of 2023 legislation, this report includes information related to larger pieces of housing and land use legislation from the past six years as well to provide additional context.

DISCUSSION: Before summarizing the 2023 housing and land use legislation, this section will first provide an overview of the shifting legislative landscape regarding these areas. Since 2017, the California Legislature and Governor have become more aggressive on housing and land use to facilitate the production of more affordable and market rate housing statewide. The Housing Accountability Act (HAA), amended substantially in 2017 and several times since, (Government Code Section 65589.5) states, in part:

California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions.

The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives. While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable to Californians of all income levels is a key factor. The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted unaffordability. According to reports and data, California has accumulated an unmet housing backlog of nearly

21.1 2,000,000 units and must provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with growth through 2025.

California has continued to not meet the pace of adding 180,000 new units annually, averaging only around 100,000 units annually since 2017. Given the severity of the issues, the legislature further notes that a key way for jurisdictions to facilitate more housing is to reduce barriers to housing proposals. The HAA states that the California Legislature has found that:
(1) The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California. (2) California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing.
(3) Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.
(4) Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.

The HAA goes on to explicitly state its intent to limit local control as a means to promote housing projection when it states:

The Legislature’s intent in enacting this section in 1982 and in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled.

These words, along with other similar statements in the HAA, set the tone for the changing legislative landscape around housing and land use, both in the HAA and in other legislative changes, such as modifications to the State Density Bonus Law. The bills below summarize key housing and land use legislation passed since 2017. “SB” stands for Senate Bill and “AB” stands for Assembly Bill, followed by the bill number and year signed into law. If a bill was signed into law in 2017 for instance, it would then go into effect in 2018. 2017-2022 Legislation Overview
Between 2017 and 2022, at least 129 housing-related bills were passed, with some providing large, significant changes and others providing minor updates. The bills summarized below have broad implications, and their enactment has had significant implications for how Santa Cruz has approached housing development applications.

21.2 SB 167 (2017) – HAA Amendment. SB 167 significantly strengthened the HAA and reduced the power of jurisdictions to deny or render housing development proposals infeasible. The bill requires that decision-makers make specific findings if denying a housing development project or placing conditions on the project that render it infeasible. These findings require a “preponderance of evidence” and other high thresholds to meet. Additionally, changes made to a General Plan or Zoning Ordinance by a jurisdiction can no longer apply to a housing development proposal if its application had already been deemed complete, preventing jurisdictions from “moving the goal post” as it were.

SB 35 (2017) – Affordable Housing Streamlined Approval. SB 35 entitles qualifying development projects with that meet minimum affordable housing requirements to a streamlined review process and restricts the ability of local governments to reject these proposals. The streamlined review process includes set review times, limited public meetings, and no California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. Projects that qualify and meet objective development standards cannot be denied by local decision-makers.

Projects qualify for this streamlined approval process if jurisdictions have failed to meet their pro rata share of regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) targets. If a jurisdiction has not met its low or very low income RHNA targets, a development must propose 50% or affordable housing to qualify for SB 35 streamlining. If a jurisdiction has not met its above moderate (market rate) RHNA target, a development only has to propose 10% affordable units or meet the jurisdiction’s inclusionary requirement, whichever is greater. This means that if the City of Santa Cruz is not producing enough market rate housing, most housing development will qualify for SB 35 streamlining, reducing the public process time and impacting the City’s ability to make decisions on the project. (The SB 35 streamlining applicability was expanded this year, through SB 423, to include projects in the Coastal Zone. SB 423 is further discussed below in the 2023 Legislation Summaries section.)
AB 3194 (2018) –HAA Amendment. AB 3194 further strengthened the HAA by specifying that a proposed housing development is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards if the housing development project is consistent with the objective General Plan standards. Thus, AB 3194 established that development standards in the General Plan supersede standards in the Zoning Ordinance. Prior to this decision, General Plan development standards were considered “general,” for lack of a better word, and the more specific standards of the Zoning Ordinance had the most control. This amendment requires consistency in land use documents and where inconsistent, whichever standard allows for a greater amount of housing is to be used.

SB 330 (2019) – Housing Crisis Act of 2019. SB 330 modified the HAA and the Permit Streamlining Act and adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. It is a large and especially impactful bill with many changes geared towards streamlining the permitting of housing and put in place housing replacement requirements.

In brief, SB 330 prohibits the City from enacting a development policy or standard that would reduce the intensity of land use, impose design review standards that are not objective, or limit the amount of housing produced through moratoriums, caps, or delay of approvals. It freezes development standards that were in place on January 1, 2019 (unless they are made less restrictive) and does not allow housing capacity decreases below the land uses and standards that were in place on January 1, 2018.

21.3 SB 330 also made changes to the permitting process for housing development. It prohibits the City from applying new ordinances to development after a preliminary application has been submitted, defines what qualifies as a preliminary application, and limits jurisdictions to a maximum of five public meetings for a project that complies with objective standards and that has been deemed complete.

SB 330 also enacted replacement requirements for new residential development that proposes to demolish qualifying protected units such as affordable homes. These replacement requirements are determined during the permitting process with more information on these replacement requirements found online here: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/citydepartments/planning-and-community-development/demolition-of-housing.

AB 68, AB 881, SB 13 (2019) – Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Feasibility. There has been additional Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) legislation after these bills, but this set of bills that went into effect on January 1, 2020 represented the largest shift in their processing and development standards. These bills created a ministerial approval process for ADUs and JADUs, removed parking requirements and parking replacement requirements, removed lot coverage requirements, increased maximum square footage allowed, and decreased setback requirements. These bills also decreased fees, shortened application review timelines, and made changes to occupancy requirements, including prohibiting owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs permitted between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2025. Since these bills passed, the City has seen a steady rise in ADU applications, from 46 in 2019 to 119 in 2023. Additional recent ADU legislation, such as 2022’s AB 2221, have adjusted mandatory development standards, such as reducing minimum setbacks and increasing maximum height limits for ADUs.

AB 2345 (2020) – Density Bonus Increase to 50%. The State Density Bonus previously allowed up to a 35% increase in market-rate housing development density if the project met certain affordable housing requirements. In some instances, meeting the City’s 20% inclusionary requirement could qualify a development for the 50% Density Bonus, the same as it could for the previous 35% Density Bonus. (For example, the City requires single room occupancy (SRO) projects to provide 20% of the units at very low income. That previously qualified projects for the maximum 35% Density Bonus, and upon enactment of AB 2345, meeting the City standard qualified an SRO project for the maximum 50% Density Bonus.) The City has already entitled development using the 50% Density Bonus, and a majority of housing projects utilize the Density Bonus, so staff anticipates that increased Density Bonus incentives will continue to be highly utilized in the City.

SB 9 (2021) – Two Units and Lot Splits in Single-Family Zones. SB 9 is called the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act. This bill allows homeowners in singlefamily zones to subdivide their property into roughly two equal lots (60%/40% area split maximum) and build two units on each of the two lots. Rear and side setbacks shall be four feet and no parking may be required if the parcel is within a half-mile walking distance from quality transit or within one block of car share. The City’s other development standards may still apply so long as they do not preclude any of the four units from being at least 800 square feet in area.

The City has prepared a guide for residents to understand how SB 9 is applied in the City. It is available online at
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/11565/3916.

21.4 Newly created SB 9 lots can be sold individually, and new SB 9 units could be rented or sold as condos too, thus seeking to increase housing market diversity through what will likely be smaller units and/or smaller lots in single-family neighborhoods. Projects that meet the SB 9 requirements must be approved ministerially by the City and are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

AB 2097 (2022) – No Minimum Parking Requirement Near Transit. AB 2097 removed the ability for a jurisdiction to impose or enforce any minimum automobile parking requirement on a development project if the project is located within one-half mile of public transit (determined by Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) and mapped in City’s Geographic Information Systems), other than electric vehicle parking and accessible spaces. These areas represent a majority of the City, with half-mile buffers from transit stations in downtown (covering all of downtown and the proposed downtown expansion area), the corridors (covering large portions of the City), and Bay Avenue and Western Drive (covering the Upper Westside towards the UCSC campus).

State Enforcement Power
Mechanisms to enforce housing laws are recently of special interest to the state, especially if a jurisdiction is not meeting its housing production targets set by the state through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process or if they are otherwise not complying with the latest changes to State law. While many recent bills provide incentives for housing production, some seek to enhance enforcement of state housing laws such as the HAA, SB 35, and the three bills described further in the 2023 Legislation Summaries section (AB 434, AB 821, and AB 1485).

In addition to bills, the state has increased its capacity to proactively enforce housing laws. The Attorney General’s Office now has a Housing Strike Force to provide greater legal avenues to address the housing crisis and increase housing access, affordability, and equity. Since the inception of the Housing Strike Force in late 2021, jurisdictions not complying with housing and land use laws have been met with threats of litigation, and two cities, Huntington Beach and Elk Grove, have had lawsuits filed against them by the State. The Housing Strike Force has gained additional legal powers through the recent approval of AB 1485 described in the next section.

AB 434, discussed further below, also expands HCD’s enforcement authority by bringing in more housing law requirements under the purview of HCD’s Housing Accountability Unit (HAU). Prior to this law, the HAU had already grown tremendously over the past few years. The HAU seeks to ensure that jurisdictions are not putting unlawful barriers to housing production.

The Unit follows up on any complaints received against a jurisdiction regarding possible housing law violations, and there are also now many state employees who proactively review the policies and Zoning Ordinances of jurisdictions to determine compliance with state law. For instance, the City has been contacted several times by the HAU to ensure that the City is complying with the many recent ADU and HAA laws. In these instances, staff needed to provide the HAU with detailed information showing that the City was in compliance. Staff anticipates these types of housing law compliance audits will continue or even increase given the expansion of HCD’s oversight powers.

One other example of HCD’s new proactive approach is that in October 2023, the HAU released a 44-page report (https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/policy-and-research/planreport/sf-housing-policy-and-practice-review.pdf) on the failure of the City and County of San

21.5 Francisco to produce adequate amounts housing. The report detailed policies and practices that must change in order to remove barriers to housing, and the State’s enforcement mechanisms were made clear:

The City’s failure to implement the Required Actions will result in HCD initiating the process to revoke housing element compliance. Various consequences may apply if the City does not have a housing element in compliance with Housing Element Law, including ineligibility or delay in receiving certain state funds, referral to the California Office of the Attorney General, court-imposed financial penalties, the loss of local land use authority to a court-appointed agent, and the application of the “builder’s remedy.”
As noted with the City’s recent Housing Element certification, the “builder’s remedy” allows for residential or mixed-use projects meeting certain affordability thresholds to ignore local land use law and construct those residential or mixed use projects as whatever standards they like, with no regard to local heights, setbacks, densities, or other development standards. 2023 Legislation Summaries
In 2023, the Governor signed 62 bills into law related to housing and land use. This represents the Legislature’s continued and increased commitment to facilitating housing production at all affordability levels in California. While many of these bills are more minor or place-specific, others are especially impactful to housing and land use decision-making in Santa Cruz and are summarized below. The Gualco Group, Inc. provided a legislation analysis to the City this past November, which is attached for further information. In addition to providing information on the 2023 legislative session, the Gualco Group’s memo also offers some things to watch for 2024 and places some focus on the shift in housing decision-making from local government to the state. Holland & Knight, a firm that specializes in real estate law, published a comprehensive guide to 2023 land use and housing legislation which is also attached. The summaries below copy and/or abridge the summaries in the Holland & Knight guide. The bills are grouped into five categories: Housing Production, Anti-Displacement, Accessory Dwelling Units, CEQA Exemptions and Reform, and Enforcement. As all the bills below are from 2023, rather than the year after the bill number, the author of the bill is noted.

Housing Production
AB 1287 (Alvarez) Additional Density Bonuses up to 100% for Very-Low or Moderate Income Units. This year's State Density Bonus Law amendments provide benefits to projects that provide additional very-low or moderate income units. AB 1287 requires that a project maximize the production of very-low, low or moderate units, as allowed by the current State Density Bonus Law (i.e., 15 percent very-low, 24 percent low or 44 percent moderate- with moderate units specifically required to be for-sale) before utilizing the bonuses in AB 1287.

Where these maximums are met, additional bonuses can be stacked on top of the prior maximum bonus. As an example, if a project includes 25 percent very-low income units, it can now achieve an 88.75 percent bonus by coupling the prior maximum bonus of 50 percent with an additional

38.75 percent bonus awarded by AB 1287. Additionally, a project that includes 59 percent moderate for-sale units can achieve a 100 percent bonus by coupling the prior maximum bonus of 50 percent with an additional 50 percent bonus granted by AB 1287.

21.6 AB 1490 (Lee) – Adaptive Reuse for Affordable Housing. AB 1490 makes "adaptive reuse" – retrofitting and repurposing of an existing building to create new residential units – an "allowable use" for qualifying 100 percent affordable housing projects, even if such a use conflicts with local plans, zoning ordinances or regulations.

SB 4 (Wiener) – By-Right Approval for Affordable Housing on Land Owned by Religious Organizations and Higher Education Institutions. Referred to as the “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill, SB 4 creates a "by right," CEQA-exempt, time-limited (90-180 day) approval process closely modeled on SB 35 of 2017 and AB 2011 of 2022 for affordable housing projects (including qualifying ground-floor commercial, childcare center and community center uses) on land owned by religious organizations and higher education institutions. Such a project can be entitled to approval even if the project is inconsistent with applicable local general plan and zoning requirements. Instead, a project is entitled to a height of one story above applicable local requirements and to specified minimum residential densities of between 10-40 dwelling units per acre, depending upon the project's location.

SB 423 (Wiener) – Extension and Expansion of SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Law for Affordable Projects Consistent with Objective Development Standards. SB 423 significantly expands, and extends the "sunset date" of, the streamlined ministerial approval law originally created by SB 35 in 2017. SB 423 extends the provisions of SB 35 to 2036, and it reduces requirements for its use including removing specified labor requirements for projects under 85 feet in height and making this streamlining applicable in the Coastal Zone.

SB 684 (Caballero) – Ministerial Approval of Up to 10-Unit Housing Projects in MultiFamily Zoning. In an effort to meet the need for "missing-middle" housing types that are not inherently expensive to build, SB 684 requires CEQA-exempt ministerial approval for up to 10 units of ownership housing on qualifying multifamily infill sites of no more than 5 acres.

Anti-Displacement
AB 1218 (Lowenthal) – Revisions to Requirements for Replacement Units and Relocation Benefits Applicable to Demolition of Protected Housing. This law creates a new article within the Government Code for replacement housing and relocation benefit requirements that were previously contained within the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. The revised provisions expand replacement requirements to nonresidential developments. Development projects that demolish vacant or occupied protected units or that are located on sites where protected units were demolished in the last five years will be required to replace all protected units that currently exist or were demolished after January 2020. Only industrial projects in zones that prohibit residential uses, which demolish residential units that are nonconforming uses, are exempt from the law's replacement requirement. Nonresidential projects may satisfy the replacement requirement by contracting with a third party to develop the units, which may be located offsite within the jurisdiction of the project.

Accessory Dwelling Units
AB 976 (Ting) – Owner-Occupancy Requirements Prohibited Beyond 2025. Current state ADU law prohibits local agencies from imposing "owner-occupancy" conditions on ADUs permitted between Jan. 1, 2020, and Jan. 1, 2025. AB 976 extends the prohibition indefinitely,

21.7 meaning local agencies cannot impose owner-occupancy conditions on ADU projects permitted after Jan. 1, 2025. Local agencies are still required to impose owner-occupancy requirements on JADUs, which are defined as units that are no more than 500 square feet, contained entirely within a single-family residence and equipped with separate or shared sanitation facilities.

AB 1033 (Ting) – ADUs Sold Separately as Condos. State ADU law has historically allowed local agencies to prohibit the separate sale or conveyances of ADUs from the primary dwelling.

The sole exception to that rule has been that qualified nonprofits can sell or convey an ADU separately from the primary residence to a qualified low-income buyer, through the establishment of a tenancy in common. The original intent behind this regime was to support ADUs' role in adding rental unit stock throughout the state as opposed to being a viable source of homeownership. AB 1033 now authorizes (but does not require) local agencies to adopt local ordinances allowing ADUs to be conveyed as condominiums separately from the primary dwelling.

AB 1332 (Carrillo) – Streamlined (30-Day) Review of Preapproved ADU Plans. Even prior to the enactment of AB 1332, local agencies were required to approve or deny a complete ADU application within 60 days (including approvals and sign-offs from all interagency departments, special districts and utilities). AB 1332 creates an even more streamlined approval process for locally "preapproved" ADU designs. By Jan. 1, 2025, local agencies must develop a program for the preapproval of ADU plans whereby the local agency accepts ADU plan submissions for preapproval. Once an ADU plan is approved, local agencies are required to either approve or deny an ADU application utilizing a preapproved ADU plan within 30 days. The bill also specifies that local agencies must maintain a website page with preapproved ADU plans and the contact information of companies offering preapproved ADU plans. Lastly, AB 1332 specifies that ADU plans approved by the local agency or "other agencies within the state" (i.e., HCD) can be admitted into the local preapproval program. While some cities such as San Jose have already enjoyed success with preapproved ADU design programs, such programs will now become mandatory across the state.

CEQA Exemptions and Reform
AB356 (Mathis) - Aesthetics Not Considered Significant for the Purpose of CEQA. This law is titled the Dilapidated Building Refurbishment Act. It extends the sunset date from 2024 until 2029 on an existing provision that waives consideration of aesthetic impacts under CEQA for projects that refurbish, convert, repurpose or replace an existing building and meet certain criteria.

AB 1307 (Wicks) – Residential Noise Impacts. AB 1307 is a direct reaction to the University of California, Berkeley "students are pollution" case, holding that an EIR for UC-Berkeley's 2036-37 long-range development plan – and specifically the university's immediate plan to build student housing on the site of "People's Park" – failed to assess potential noise impacts from loud student parties in residential neighborhoods near the campus. The case has been appealed to the California Supreme Court, which granted review. In the meantime, AB 1307 specifies that, for residential projects, noise generated by occupants and their guests is not a significant effect on the environment. The law's author notes that the law will reestablish existing precedent that minor noise nuisances such as from human voices will be addressed through local nuisance ordinances and not via CEQA. As such, CEQA cannot be used to consider "people as pollution."

21.8 Less broadly applicable, AB 1307 also provides that an EIR prepared for a project proposed by a higher education institution shall not be required to study off-site alternatives if 1) the residential or mixed-use housing project is located on a site that is no more than 5 acres and is substantially surrounded by urban uses and 2) the residential mixed-use project has already been evaluated in the EIR for the most recent long-range development plan for the applicable campus.

As an "urgency statute," the law took effect when signed into law on Sept. 7, 2023.

AB 1449 (Alvarez) – CEQA Exemption for 100% Affordable Housing. AB 1449 adds a new exemption not only for the entitlement of qualifying affordable housing but also for the actions leading up to and following project approval, including general plan amendments and rezonings, the lease or sale of property and financing decisions. The fact that the exemption also applies to the actions leading up to a project helps address the line of cases addressing when an action becomes a “project” under CEQA, holding that a lead agency's actions that commit an agency to a project require CEQA review. Such projects must be 100 percent low-income housing projects (except for managers' units), meet prevailing wage and other labor standards identified in AB 2011, be located in an infill location and meet a range of criteria intended to ensure the site has access to transit or other amenities. This CEQA exemption sunsets on Jan. 1, 2033.

AB 1633 (Ting) – CEQA Reform for Infill Housing. AB 1633 was inspired by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors' vote to uphold a CEQA appeal of a proposed 495-unit infill development project. The legislation is the most direct reform in recent years aiming to crack down on excessive CEQA review practices that are weaponized against residential development.

Rather than amending CEQA directly, AB 1633 operates by defining two new violations of the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), which can expose jurisdictions to litigation and vulnerability to pay attorneys' fees and penalties. First, under AB 1633, it is now an HAA violation to refuse to make a CEQA exemption determination when dealing with an AB 1633- protected project that is entitled to a CEQA exemption. This addition is designed to prevent local governments from insisting on full CEQA analysis when a project is entitled to bypass CEQA.

AB 1633 also creates a 90-day notice procedure, whereby applicants who believe they are entitled to CEQA exemptions may protest when local governments proceed with CEQA review.

If there is substantial evidence that the project is entitled to a CEQA exemption, then the agency has 90 days to make an exemption determination. Failure to do so constitutes an HAA violation.

Second, it is now an HAA violation for a local government to hold a meeting at which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or similar CEQA document is considered, but decline to approve that document, if there is substantial evidence to support EIR certification and the project is protected by AB 1633. This addition directly addresses the San Francisco development project situation, wherein the Board of Supervisors indicated they were seeking to disapprove the project but avoided liability by technically only rejecting certification of the project's EIR.

SB 91 (Umberg) – Motel Conversion Exemption. SB 91 extends indefinitely the CEQA exemption for projects that convert motels, hotels, residential hotels or hostels to supportive or transitional housing that was otherwise set to expire in January 2025. In addition, SB 91 extends CEQA streamlining provisions for "environmental leadership transit projects" located within the County of Los Angeles that meet certain specified requirements.

21.9 SB 439 (Skinner) – Motion to Strike Lawsuit Challenging Affordable Housing. SB 439 creates a new procedural option for defending against litigation challenging 100 percent affordable housing projects, modeled on California's "anti-SLAPP" law that protects defendants from lawsuits designed to chill political participation and free speech. SB 439 creates a new "special motion to strike" any portions of a pleading that challenge the approval or permitting of a 100 percent affordable project. If the plaintiff challenging the project does not establish a probability of prevailing in the litigation, the party filing the special motion to strike is entitled to recover their attorney's fees and costs. This curbs the potential for lawsuits against proposed housing including under CEQA.

Enforcement
AB 434 (Grayson) – Expanded HCD Enforcement Authority. AB 434 significantly expands the scope of HCD's enforcement authority over state housing laws. AB 72 of 2017 granted HCD express enforcement authority with respect to four statutes: the HAA, State Density Bonus Law, fair housing law and the "no net loss" requirements for replacing housing element sites that are not developed as projected. Subsequent legislation broadened HCD's enforcement authority to cover nine additional statutes, including 2017's SB 35, 2019's SB 330 and 2022's AB 2011.

AB 434 brings thirteen more areas of law into HCD's enforcement authority, including five statutes adopted this year. Now, the following state housing laws are enforceable by HCD:
several provisions streamlining approvals for ADUs, along with a provision allowing certain ADUs to be sold separately from the primary residence; several requirements of 2021's SB 9, concerning ministerial processing of lot splits in single-family residential zones (discussed herein); 2022's SB 6, which allows residential development in certain commercial zones; the socalled "five hearing rule" applicable to code-compliant residential projects; this year's SB 684, requiring ministerial approval of certain small multifamily infill projects (discussed herein); this year's SB 4, concerning ministerial approval of affordable housing on religious sites (discussed herein); and this year's AB 1218, addressing replacement of demolished housing units (discussed herein).

AB 821 (Grayson) – Local Agency Obligation to Resolve General Plan and Zoning Conflicts. AB 821 provides that if a local agency receives a development application for a project that is consistent with the general plan but not the zoning, the agency must either: 1) amend the zoning ordinance within 180 days from the receipt of the development application or 2) process the application based on the general plan standards and ignore inconsistent zoning standards. AB 821 further provides a legal remedy for challenging an agency that does not comply. This provision does not apply to housing projects subject to the HAA, since the HAA already provides a mechanism requiring approval of a project that is consistent with the general plan that is inconsistent with the zoning.

AB 1485 (Haney) – Attorney General Right to Intervene in Housing Enforcement Suits.

Prior to AB 1485, in order to intervene in housing-related litigation brought by third parties, the California Department of Justice was required to petition the court for permission to participate in the litigation. This process was both time-consuming and uncertain. AB 1485 now gives both the attorney general and HCD an unconditional statutory right to intervene in cases concerning the enforcement of housing laws.

21.10 Conclusions
The bills receiving the most attention in the press are Senator Weiner’s SB 423 (extending SB 35 provisions) and SB 4 (religious site housing). AB 1287 (100% Density Bonus) has not received much attention but should, especially in places with high inclusionary affordable housing rates like Santa Cruz. The step to providing enough affordable housing to qualify for a 100% density bonus is not a great one given the City’s current inclusionary requirement. However, it is unclear how much this new law will be utilized to its fullest extent in Santa Cruz. Larger buildings can trigger changes in required construction types that increases construction costs, and those increased costs, coupled with the additional affordable units that must be provided, may dissuade some developers from pursuing a full 100% Density Bonus.

The two ADU bills highlighted deserve discussion too because they coincide with other ADU amendments proposed on the Council’s same, January 23, 2024 agenda related to the ADU Urgency Ordinance extension. Given that AB 976 now indefinitely waives owner occupancy as a requirement for ADUs constructed after 2020, the City’s owner occupancy requirement before 2020 should be removed. Staff will be bringing forward that proposed amendment with the formal adoption of the ADU urgency ordinance in the fall of 2024. In response to the ADU owner occupancy changes, accompanying adjustments to the Rental Inspection Program regulations will also be included with the proposed amendment.

As part of that amendment package, Council could also consider using the provisions set forth in AB 1033 to allow ADUs to be sold separately to anyone. Previously, ADUs were only allowed to be sold to qualifying affordable housing non-profit organizations. The benefit of adopting this new allowance would be to provide more housing ownership opportunities in the City and create a greater variety of ownership opportunities, in an effort to reach people that could not afford to own housing previously. The drawback to allowing condominium conversions for ADUs is that the policy could result in displacement of existing tenants. Should Council want to explore condominium conversions for ADUs, staff intends to evaluate and propose anti-displacement measures, such as enhanced relocation assistance, along with the ADU condominium conversion allowances. While more analysis is needed, staff currently believes that anti-displacement policies will allow for the benefits to outweigh the potential drawbacks of allowing ADU condominium conversions.

Health in All Policies: This report represents information on recent state bills geared toward increasing housing production at all affordability levels and other improvements to land use processes that help residents and builders alike. By expanding awareness of and following these laws, the City is advancing the HiAP pillars of equity, public health, and sustainability.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This legislative update is not considered a project under CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of these bills varies. Over time, housing generally has a net negative fiscal impact due to the cost of services provided to residents, and many of these bills generally promote housing production not just in Santa Cruz but throughout the state. So some of the bills could ultimately have a negative fiscal impact, particularly over time; however, the direct fiscal impacts of these bills are unknown.

21.11 Prepared by:

Matt VanHua
Principal Planner – Advance
Planning
Submitted by:

Lee Butler
Director of Planning and
Community Development
Approved by:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. THE GUALCO GROUP, INC. 2023 LEGISLATION ASSESSMENT

2. HOLLAND AND KNIGHT 2023 LEGISLATION SUMMARIES

21.12 DATE: November 10, 2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Matt Huffaker, City Manager
City of Santa Cruz
Overall Assessment of the Shift in Housing Decision-Making from Local Government to the State of California
On September 14th, the California Legislature wrapped up the first year of a two-year legislative session, with several dozen housing bills sent to the governor’s desk for his signature. Drawing the most public attention was Senate Bill (SB) 423 (Wiener), which would extend and expand Senator Wiener’s 2017 housing streamlining law, SB 35.

Legislation was also passed aiming to curtail the use of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to stop or delay new housing construction on the basis of new residents’ actions being classified as “pollution” and impactful to the environment. In addition, the Legislature passed a number of bills authorizing statewide ballot measures related to housing, potentially giving California voters a chance to weigh in at the ballot box in 2024. There were also several bills that received less attention that, if passed, will create meaningful changes on topics such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs), state density bonus law, and tenant protections.

This commentary from the UC Berkeley’s Terner Center (as modified) briefly summarizes key bills that were signed into law as well as key bills that may be pursued next year as part of the two-year Session. 500 CAPITOL MALL, SUITE 2600
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4752
TEL (916) 441-1392
FAX (916) 446-6003
[email protected]

21.13 Efforts to Facilitate More Affordable and Moderate-Income Housing Production
The Legislature has continued its remarkable run over the last several years of providing developers of deed-restricted affordable housing ever more flexibility to exceed or override local zoning, greater certainty on the timing and likelihood of planning approvals, and substantial relief from CEQA review and litigation.

SB 4 (Wiener) streamlines affordable housing on lands owned by faith-based organizations and non-profit institutions of higher education. A recent study by the Terner Center identified approximately 171,000 acres of land across the state that may be wellpositioned for affordable housing development under SB 4.

As mentioned above, SB 423 (Wiener) extends and expands the applicability of SB 35, which was passed in 2017 and was scheduled to sunset in 2026. SB 35 has facilitated the approval or application process for over 18,000 new homes between 2018 and 2021, the large majority of which are affordable housing units. SB 423 would expand applicability to the California Coastal Zone, and would create new labor standards for mixed-income projects. Building on a successful San Diego program, AB 1287 (Alvarez) modifies state Density Bonus law to allow developers to apply for a moderate-income density bonus in cases when the developer has already included the maximum number of low- or very-low income units in the proposed development. SB 684 (Caballero) facilitates the subdivision of multifamily zoned parcels of five acres or less into up to ten for-sale lots, including by relaxing CEQA requirements, expediting permitting timelines, and mandating decision-making within 60 days.

AB 1490 (Lee) incentivizes affordable housing adaptive reuse projects by mandating expedited permit approval times and lowered energy bills. AB 1449(Alvarez & Wicks) exempts 100 percent affordable housing developments from CEQA review provided the projects meet specific criteria including adhering to labor standards.

21.14 SB 439 (Skinner) curbs the potential for lawsuits against proposed housing including under CEQA by creating a special motion to strike a challenge to the approval or permitting of an affordable housing development. Influenced by the appeals court decision that the University of California at Berkeley failed to consider noise generated by students and visitors as an environmental impact and thus halting proposed housing development on People’s Park, AB 1307(Wicks) stipulates that the impacts of noise generated by students and visitors are not significant environmental impacts. While the specific People’s Park case will still go to the California Supreme Court for review, this bill will further alleviate public universities’ obligation to explore alternative project locations in environmental impact reports if specified requirements are met.

SB 469 (Allen) reforms Article 34, a provision in the California Constitution that was authorized by the voters in 1954 to limit the creation of new affordable housing by mandating that a local election be held to approve new publicly-funded affordable housing. The law aims to increase the number of projects that can bypass voter approval, as long as the affordable housing development includes certain types of departmental funding or tax credits aimed at creating affordable housing.

Legislation to Enhance Enforcement of State Housing Laws Several bills enhance or clarify enforcement authority of different state housing laws. AB 1633 (Ting) amends the Housing Accountability Act to clarify that it is a violation for a local jurisdiction to deny or withhold an environmental clearance to which an urban infill housing development is entitled without substantial evidence justifying additional environmental study. AB 434(Grayson) reduces the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)’s review period for locally approved housing elements or amendments from 90 days to 60 days. And it provides HCD with express authority to enforce housing statutes including: SB 6 (2022), SB 9 (2022), AB 1218 (2023), SB 4 (2023), and SB 684 (2023). AB 1485 (Haney) would expand the authorities of both HCD and the office of the Attorney General to have the unconditional

21.15 right to represent the state in any legal action addressing a violation of specified housing laws by local governments.1
AB 821 (Grayson) creates a notification process and time limit of 180 days for jurisdictions to align their zoning code with the land use element of the general plan when there is a live project application.

The bill would also build on existing law that applies to projects that are at least two-thirds residential, to allow mixed-use and other projects to proceed if the city’s zoning code is inconsistent with its housing element. AB 281 (Grayson) stipulates that special districts (e.g., sewer, water, and power utilities) conform to certain timeframes, analogous to those set for cities and counties, for the review of postentitlement permit applications from housing developers. SB 567 (Durazo) strengthens protections established in AB 1482 (2019) for renters facing evictions for renovations or landlord move-in.

Additional Notable Bills
The Legislature has passed additional bills aiming to enhance housing affordability and availability, covering areas such as studying different housing systems, land usage, parking reforms, and tax exemptions for affordable housing.

SB 555 (Wahab) mandates that HCD undertake a study on social housing and how it could help local housing supply. AB 835 (Lee) instructs the California State Fire Marshal to explore and formulate standards for single-exit, single stairway apartment houses in buildings exceeding three stories in order to reduce costs otherwise associated with construction of multiple staircases.

AB 84 (Ward) improves access to the welfare property tax exemption for affordable housing developments that utilize 501(c)3 bonds, including by allowing such a property to continue to receive the welfare exemption when a household’s income increases following initial occupancy, up to a maximum of 100 percent of the area median income. AB 12 (Haney) would limit allowable security deposit requirements for certain apartments to a maximum of one month’s rent.

21.16 The Legislature also passed measures that build on statewide parking reform, an issue found to increase the cost to build housing by up to $36,000 per unit. AB 894 (Friedman) would require agencies to allow property owners to share underutilized parking and to count such shared parking toward meeting local parking requirements. AB 1317 (Wendy Carrillo) requires owners to unbundle parking from the price of rent in certain residential properties.

AB 1332 (Juan Carrillo) requires that local governments create preapproved plans or provide private entity lists of pre-approved designs for ADUs, replicating a best practice currently employed only in a few California cities and counties.

AB 976 (Ting) permanently disallows owner occupancy requirements on ADUs. AB 1033 (Ting) grants authorization to local governments to allow ADUs to be sold separately from the primary residence, allowing ADUs in California to become an option for entry-level homeownership opportunities.

Looking Ahead to 2024
This coming March, California voters will have the opportunity to vote on the Behavioral Health Services Act Bond (AB 531 Irwin, SB 326 Eggman), a $6.38 billion General Obligation bond to fund new mental health treatment and permanent supportive housing units. The bond would be funded as an allocation from ongoing income tax proceeds from the Mental Health Services’ “millionaire’s’ tax”, passed in 2004.

In November 2024, voters will decide on at least two housing-related ballot propositions set forward by the Legislature. ACA 1 (Aguiar Curry) seeks to make it easier for local governments to impose taxes to fund certain housing and transportation projects by lowering the threshold to approve special taxes and bonds from two-thirds to 55 percent. SCA 2 (Allen) would repeal Article 34, a provision in the state constitution that limits the creation of new affordable housing by mandating that a local election be held to approve new publiclyfunded affordable housing.

21.17 Three proposed ballot initiatives have become two-year bills and have not yet passed the Legislature. First, the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2024 (AB 1657, Wicks) would issue $10 billion worth of general obligation bonds to fund affordable rental housing and
homeownership programs. Second, SB 834 would enact the California Family Home Construction and Homeownership Bond Act of 2023 (bond act), which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $25,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance the California Family Home Construction and Homeownership Program. Third, the Community College Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2024 (passed as AB 247 (Muratsuchi) and SB 28 (Glazer)) seeks to place a $15.5 billion bond to fund school facilities. The bond measure is intended to alleviate increasing impact fees that are imposed by school districts on new housing developments to pay for school facilities.

In addition, several other pieces of legislation have become two-year bills. SB 450 (Atkins) would amend provisions of SB 9 (2022), and would require 60-day local approvals for projects proposing to subdivide single-family homes or lots. It would also disallow cities from imposing differing design standards on new units compared to the existing standards and zoning in the surrounding area.

AB 68 (Ward) would present new streamlining options for infill development and aims to address climate resiliency considerations in new housing developments. AB 1630 (Garcia) would prohibit denials for student housing within proximity to university campuses for zoning purposes, and SB 440(Skinner) would empower local governments to join forces to create regional housing finance agencies to address the unique affordable housing needs in their communities. SB 7 (Blakespear) would require the regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) to include homelessness as an income category for local housing element planning purposes, and to require each city and county to develop a plan to provide housing opportunities for each person experiencing homelessness within its jurisdiction. AB 799 (L. Rivas) would require the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to establish and regularly update a financing plan such that the state could end homelessness by 2035.

21.18 Conclusion
2023’s slate of new housing laws affirms the Legislature’s and the governor’s continued interest in finding new solutions for California’s housing crisis. Since 2016, Governors Brown and Newsom have signed into law over 100 bills specific to housing, though it is not yet clear what impact these laws will have on the state’s ongoing supply, affordability, and homelessness challenges. In 2024, we are likely to see a similar level of engagement on issues of housing and homelessness.

21.19 senate housing committee

21.20

Page 1 of 21 ends

Santa Cruz City CouncilFebruary 13, 2024

Santa Cruz City Council
February 13, 2024